Trigger words: human things person (4)
Indicator sentences: "Human Being" and "Person" are very distinct concepts.
Negotiation parts: The term "human being" usually refers to a genetically unique organism of human origin. A fetus is, certainly, a human being (just one in the very early stages of development). A skin cell is not a human being (if you don't believe me, please refer back to your high school biology textbook). A sex cell is not a human being, though the zygote that is created upon the merging of two sex cells is a human being. Shifting the argument from "it is wrong to kill a human being" to "it is wrong to kill a person" is an important difference and you ought to note the change and define your concept of personhood and why you think your definition correct and useful. You have unfortunately begged the question by asserting that a fetus is a human being. It is human, no doubt, but that it is a human being is much more debatable. This is the anti-abortionist predicament: either they agree that the fetus is merely a cluster of human cells, in which case it probably doesn't have rights, or they assert that the fetus is a human being, in which case they beg the question. It seems better to just back off from the "human / human being" line of argument altogether. I have not begged the question. I nowhere agreed that the moral rule was "it is wrong to kill human beings"; I merely want to point out that "human beings" and "persons" are distinct concepts and should not be used interchangeably as you have done. And if you are using "human beings" and "persons" to refer to the same thing I think you should have a word that can differentiate between a zygote and a skin cell since they are, biologically, very different. [STA-CITE]> I have not begged the question. I nowhere agreed that the moral rule was "it is wrong to kill human beings"; I merely want to point out that "human beings" and "persons" are distinct concepts and should not be used interchangeably as you have done. [END-CITE]Is that true? What is an example of a human being that is not a person? [STA-CITE]>Is that true? What is an example of a human being that is not a person? [END-CITE]I usually see pro-choice advocates using a *fetus* as an example of just that, but defining terms is always a problem in these kinds of discussions. My definition of "human being", as above, is **a genetically unique organism of human origin**. It's an easy concept with good scientific backing. My definition of "person" is a conscious being that knows itself and knows of its own existence. There are a *lot* of different definitions of "person" used in these kinds of debates. Feel free to substitute in your own definitions as you please; I'm happy to use your terms. Really, the moral question that is key is "What sorts of things are wrong to kill?" *That* is not a trivial question. What makes killing wrong? What sorts of characteristics does a thing need to have before we shy away from killing it? Is consciousness necessary? This is where it's important for us to know what you mean by "person", "human", "human being", "human thing", etc and it frustrated me that you used those terms, to my mind, interchangeably. Of course, you've been perfectly cordial so far and you used "begging the question" in the logically correct sense and I thank you from the bottom of my heart for that. :)