So if someone has IVF and freezes fertilised eggs which are then later discarded then you consider them “person” killers?
If somebody had some IVF embryos frozen for the future and somebody else destroyed them, would you consider them to be "Just Tissue"?
(Not sure what the current legal status is actually)
In any case, this is really a side issue to allow people to hide the fact from themselves that they are killing unwanted "children" by using Sophistic arguments that its OK because they aren't really people.
Me, I am fine with eugenics/whatever.
My Edwardian Grand-mama introduced me to the concept of the "Sink Test" (Common when she had been a young woman) over 40 years ago.
But consider this real-life scenario.
And older Woman is pregnant.
She is concerned about Downs, and is willing to have an abortion if the test proves positive.
The trouble is, the traditional diagnostic test (Amniocentesis) is invasive and carries a high risk of causing a miscarrige. From what I have read, the risk of miscarriage is actually highr than getting a positive result from the test (So there is a greater risk of miscarrying a health child than getting a positve result on a sick one)
Now, with this in mind, and bearing in mind that one has already decided that a child carrying Downs would be killed.
Why not wait until after the child is born, then perform the test, and then kill it if the test confirms the condition.
This does not affect the outcome if the test is positive and avoids the risk of miscarrying an otherwise healthy child.
If the pro-abortionists are happy with killing a Downs baby before it is born, why are they not happy to kill it afterwards?
To my mind there is really no ethical diference between the two scenarious (And I actually have less of an issue with the latter one than I do with the former one really since the latter does not put an otherwise healthy child at risk)
As I have said all along, I am not anti-abortion. I am anti Hypocrisy and self-delusion.