Unfertilized eggs are not human and have no capacity to become human. Should “lesser” humans have fewer rights than “full” humans? I think we’ve already been through that a few times in history and it has always turned out to be the wrong choice.
They don’t need the capacity to become human they are human. How else would you describe these unfertilized eggs except as living organisms, species human? Unless you want to suggest your ancestors are egg, human, egg, human, egg, human …
If you want to give all humans the same rights then they should clearly qualify. Of course giving an egg, fetus, or baby the right to vote in an election is going to run into some practical problems.
I'm not conceding any other part of whatever argument you're making, but saying that unfertilized eggs are individual humans is completely ludicrous. They aren't separate organisms. They might eventually be used to create one, but it's not likely. This is like arguing that every skin cell is an individual human just because you could theoretically extract DNA from it and make a clone.
Eggs are happy to sit frozen for decades outside a human body after the donors death then be implanted in someone else. That’s a living organism though less hardy than a HeLa cell line. Sure they aren’t viable on their own, but apparently we can’t apply that standard to a fetus.
Clearly someone should not be considered alive because theirs frozen eggs still alive. That’s independent.
Eggs that are sitting around like that presumably have vastly higher odds of being implanted than one of your random skin cells. Something like 15 orders of magnitude or more.
Despite what is sometimes said, the moment of fertilization isn’t suddenly creating life both cells where alive before that point.
Maybe if the state enforced birth crowd adopted some post-birth childcare policies that weren't pure social darwinism and rugged individualism, less people would want to abort...
