Okay, well, foetus and embryo are both words used to dehumanize. Of course, you may argue that their initial purpose is to describe the various developmental stages of the human, but it's occurred to me that the pro-choice side will use these words commonly, up until birth. In order to make the human life sounds anything but a human life, these words continue to navigate the abortion discussion, and understandably, if the pro-choice side wants to maintain that particular boundary between policy and morality.

The objective standpoint in this debate is that life begins at conception. Every scientific textbook will tell you this. You will only find arbitrary definitions as to when human life begins on the other side; some say life begins at 10 weeks, some say 24, some say not until birth, some say when he/she/it can feel pain, some say when self-awareness kicks in, etc. These aren't substantial and are lacking in objectivity. Of course, people won't hesitate to justify violence when it suits them.

The right to choose cannot overwrite the right to life, and that is my stance. If you claim otherwise, then you are openly admitting that human life has no value, that we should throw away anything we know about human development, that you are embracing a society where we live without moral consequence and do whatever the fuck we like as long as we bloody well like it. That, to me, does not sound like an improvement.