More quick thoughts on Abortion [Human Life and Human Rights]

Can we still take it for granted that political candidates for the highest office are educated people? You would think so, at least on the simplest subjects. But considering one presidential candidate's statement that when human life begins is an unknowable matter of theological or scientific belief that is above his paygrade* you might want to think again.
By using some common sense I think we can establish that what we're talking about at human conception is both human and alive. There are only so many qualifying categories and so either it's alive, dead, or some kind of inanimate object. Progress in science has revealed to us a world of molecules and atoms and protons and so defining what life is can be complicated considering all the intricacies and philosophical presuppositions. But generally we don't qualify things like rocking chairs and fence posts and coffee cups as alive or dead, they're just sitting around kinds of things. Things that are alive move and eat and metabolize, and we can always recognize something that is dead by the fact that it used to be alive but now isn't.
In human conception there is one egg--which by common sense is a living thing--and one sperm--which by common sense is a living thing (and I know of no successful conception using dead ones) so do you think the product of conception is alive or dead? If it continues the natural process from conception eventually is born an infant human child--which presupposes that it was a living human entity earlier on because nothing else is ever born a living human child except living human children.
I think some understanding can be found considering that it was more of a mystery what exactly happened at conception before the science and technology caught up, but the sciences have really caught up so that nobody can deny anymore that the product of a human conception is obviously human and alive. Anyone who says differently is very under-educated on these things or depending on an education from a long time ago, or they're in some kind of strange denial of the obvious, or they might be replacing common sense with politics because it suits their purpose. No matter what one's motivations it seems strangely out of place for someone who wants to be a leader of the free world to not get a grip on things as simple as the fact that from conception it's human and it's alive. You can't argue reasonably that anytime between conception and birth it's something other than living and human or that there's a point in time when suddenly it becomes alive and human.
Everything is alive before the conception, everything is alive at and during the conception, and everything is alive after the conception and either it's human or it's something else--and nobody reasonable is really claiming that it's something else. Seems like calling it anything but alive would be silly, calling it anything but human would be unscientific, and to deny it human rights would be blatantly uncompassionate.

*Statement attributed to Senator Barack Obama in response to the question of when human rights begin as delivered at the Saddleback Civil Forum on National Leadership held Aug. 16, 2008 in Lake Forest CA. Forum can be viewed in its entirety at www.saddlebackcivilforum.com/thepresidency/index.html

Adapted from Human Life, and Human Rights by Chris Neiswonger