system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
When does a fetus become a person?

I don't really know where to draw the line. I personally don't view an embryo/fetus as a person in the first trimester... But that isn't really an argument, right? Because someone else could view it differently. Hell, someone could view the sperm and egg as persons... And I technically couldn't say they're wrong in doing so. Point is, I don't have a good way of determining when a blob of tissue becomes a person. Thoughts?
gpt
This question is frequently asked with the hidden premise that personhood is binary, in that one either has it (and is deserving of moral consideration) or does not have it (and is not deserving of  moral consideration.)

The Gradient Theory of Personhood suggests that this may not be the case, and rather than being like a on/off switch that is toggled at some point (which we have yet to agree on, if it exists at all) personhood is a quality which one can have in varying amounts.

This may be unsatisfying in the goal of defining some 'hard boundary' which delineates personhood, but also can provide guidance to who may be *more deserving of moral treatment.*

Based on the premise that the genetic material which develops into a person starts out as a non-person, and if we accept that personhood can be granted *gradually*, one could argue that an expecting mother is *more of a person* (that is to say she has more personhood, and therefore is more deserving of moral consideration) than the fetus she carries. This is not a complete account of the concept, but illustrates an alternative view of personhood which, while unsatisfying from a 'line in the sand' perspective, may be useful when faced with moral decisions.