Stefan MolyneuxVerified account

You understand your distinction is arbitrary? The moment of conception is when a child's life starts.

I can accept that a potentially viable 'life' begins at conception but I don't know that anyone other than you would argue that a mammalian blastula, zygote or fetus is a 'child'

Let's go with that then. How does this unborn child's 'life' have priority over the autonomy of a pregnant woman who does not wish to be pregnant?

If autonomy is highest value then all there are no social obligations only individual desires, and killing anyone of any age who imposes on your autonomy is justified.

I didn't argue that autonomy is the highest value that should or could relieve anyone of any social obligation, did I? My question, again, is: How does an unborn child's 'life' have priority over the bodily autonomy of a pregnant woman?

If you are having sex (consensual) without birth control, you are accepting the possibility of pregnancy. If it's not a case of BC failure, the unborn child is there by invitation. (Exceptions acknowledged) Nothing unreasonable about prioritizing life in such cases.

In some circumstances it is justified to kill a trespasser. You can't invite someone into your home then kill him for trespassing.