When are we "Human"

In the abortion debate, so much ink is wasted telling us when, precisely, a cell or two is a "human being." We all know the arguments.

A French philosopher recently wrote a short piece going more deeply into what is means to be human. In his case he was comparing a human to a human-like machine. A machine cannot, for example, aspire to be something greater than it is. A human being can do this.

A human can be aware of himself and of his relationships to others. This requires a thought process of being something other than just oneself.

The link does not discuss ante abortion politics but it should have. In this subset of religious politics a "human being" need not have any of the attributes that distinguish the difference between man and machine. To be a "human being" requires nothing except a few cells.

How these few cells different from any other cells or from the same number of cells in an animal has never been explained. It religious zeal is present, there is no need for a rational explanation. If the money rolls in why bother using logic?

Believing a fertilized cell is a "human being" is harmless until it is required of others who do not hold that religious belief.