Quote:
Since its not possible for an egg or a sperm, by themselves, to become a human I don't extend my conclusion further back than a fertilized egg.


It isn't possible for a fertilized egg by itself to become a human being.

You still did not justify why you picked fertilization, and not any other point in the multi-step process of producing a human being as an arbitrary cutoff. You failed to demonstrate in convincing manner that anything significant changed from -1 second prior fertilization to +1 second post fertilization. Going back to Donk's cake analogy - just because you mixed ingredients, you are still nowhere near enjoying a cooked cake.

What more important is that you happen to pick a very early stage, so such views are harmful to both scientific research and women's rights. Derid on other hand picked up much later stage, while his view (or any view assigning arbitrary cutoff) is also not sufficiently justified, at least it is not harmful to society.

You also didn't justify your opinion as to why exactly you are assigning special meaning to a fertilized egg outside of a human body. I just cannot see the logic of equating a researcher that does in vitro fertilization to further scientific understanding of the process with a mass murderer.

[Linked Image]