Come on, people, try to keep up. I did not dispute “that a developing baby is human”, the human DNA is sufficient to establish the genus and species.
What I am trying to make clear is that science ends mostly with the genus and species, and whether the cell is alive or dead. Science can make an educated guess as to the history of the fetus, but presented with two identical twins, science cannot tell us which was the original fertilized egg and which was derived from a later splitting of the blastula (or some other later stage).
To stretch the point, presented with two identical twins and a clone, science cannot tell us which was the original fertilized egg, which was derived from a later splitting of the blastula, and which was developed from a placental stem cell. They are all human by virtue of their DNA and their living existence. Personally, I believe they are all fully human, but make up your own mind about that. Dolly was a true sheep in every respect.
Science can tell us all three are human and alive. What science cannot tell us is at what point any society must treat that once single cell and later multicellular organism as a full human being with all the rights of a full human being in any particular human society for the purposes of forming civil law.
Can you people not distinguish between that statement and your statement but it’s a cell with human DNA? That is a question for a society to answer, not a laboratory, but its philosophers and theologians and lawmakers and people.
For pity’s sake, people, you keep calling this question a dodge. This is the essential question for any society wishing to establish laws concerning life before birth. This is the debate that we must have, but are not having because we have two sides yelling “conception” and “birth” at each other. It’s you people who are dodging the question by saying human DNA settles the issue without any further discussion. NO IT DOESN’T. Except in your own mind.