Almost no acorns would have turned into trees, so the comparison falls down. If we look at saplings, we'd be closer, and obviously killing a sapling is more or less equivalent to killing an oak tree. We don't tend to talk about "murder" when it comes to plants.
Peanuts and caviar are the same, or even more silly. Only with potatoes does the question make sense, and clearly the answer is yes, potato plants die when you harvest them. But almost nobody thinks that is an issue, since they are not even sentient.
> So what you're saying is, only things that are born matter if you kill them?
No, I'm not saying that at all, I'm saying your analogies are idiotic, since acorns don't correspond to foetuses - almost no acorns end up as trees.
> Also, that's now how potatoes work. You harvest them after the plant has died.
It was your analogy, not mine. If potatoes are only harvested when dead, how could eating them possibly be murder?
Getting back to the actual question, I don't think a baby is more alive or more human because it has left the womb, or because you've cut the umbilical cord.
If someone stabs a pregnant woman in the belly so that her foetus dies, but she survives, would you agree that he has killed her baby, or has he only harmed her?
> So you're saying that if more pregnancies ended in miscarriage abortion would be moral?
Not saying that at all. Just like last time, we are still just discussing how bad your analogies were.
> If your curious ~60% of embryos do not make it to a live birth,
I'm well aware of this, and although most of this is accounted for very early on, it's still pretty high. And of course in many cases the embryos were not viable.
> Why does the number or miscarriages matter at all?
I haven't discussed this, it was you that brought it up. With acorns, only 1 out of 10000 becomes a tree, so killing an acorn is substantially different from cutting down a tree. Not even taking into account that these are different forms, an acorn is not a small tree.
You speak as if the issue was black and white, clearly it isn't. Even you think that killing an 8 month old foetus, which has a heartbeat, can dream and even recognises its father's voice, is fundamentally different from taking a morning after pill and stopping a 4 cell cluster from turning into a human.
From a religious point of view, it's entirely reasonable to believe that anything after conception is sacred, since it's the beginning of a specific human being, but even progressive atheists realise that an 8 month foetus most definitely is a complete human.
