Why is it that many conservative Christians think this way - they say "life is sacred" to support ther being against abortion and ending life support (taking the life a human who never developed consciousness or one who did and lost it permanantly -  often someone who specifically said they didn't want to live that way) but then are pro-death penalty and against giving any kind of help to humans who are conscious and in a bad situation - ie welfare, universal health care, etc. Why do they care so much about fetuses and the brain dead?

MattShizzle wrote:

It's hard to come up with an exact point. Certainly at the point which someone isn't completely helpless and is able to think at above a dog/cat level.

I don't think it is hard to come up with a point at all, Matt.

So your argument of when life begins seems to be based on mental development.  Why don't we simply extend the age at which one can be involuntarily euthanized to the mid 20's when brain develeopment is pretty much complete? 

And why particularly mental development?  Why is the development of the brain and the chemical processes it performs in support of life any different from, say, cell division,  nutrition, circulation, or respiration, or ...?  I mean they are all just biochemical processes.  Making one a criteria just because it's a more complex process just seems kinda...I dunno...what's the word....superstituous to me.  It's kinda like worshipping one rock over another because it's bigger, ya know.