system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Abortion should be completely legal because whether or not the fetus is a person is an inarguable philosophy whereas the mother's circumstance is a clear reality

The most common and well understood against abortion, particularly coming from the religious right, is that a human's life begins at conception and abortion is thus killing a human being. That's all well and good, but plenty of other folks would disagree. A fetus might not be called a human being because there's no heartbeat, or because there's no pain receptors, or later in pregnancy they're still not a human because they're still not self-sufficient, etc. I am not concerned with the **true answer** to this argument because there isn't one - it's philosophy along the lines of personal identity. Philosophy is unfalsifiable and unprovable logic, so there is no scientifically precise answer to when a fetus becomes a person.

Having said that, the mother then deserves a large degree of freedom, being the person to actually carry the fetus. Arguing over the philosophy of when a human life starts is just a distracting talking point because whether or not a fetus is a person, the mother still has to endure pregnancy. It's her burden, thus it should be a no-brainer to grant her the freedom to choose the fate of her ambiguously human offspring.

Edit: Wow this is far and away the most popular post I've ever made, it's really hard to keep up! I'll try my best to get through the top comments today and award the rest of the deltas I see fit, but I'm really busy with school.
gpt
You’re absolutely correct that there isn’t a scientifically precise answer to when a fetus becomes a person. There is however also no scientifically precise answer as to whether anyone is a person, pregnant women included. You can’t escape the philosophy and moral discussion.