A sperm isn't a human. An egg isn't a human. An embryo isn't a human.
I agree with your point but I hate the way you phrased it. The things you mentioned aren't people, but sperm, eggs, and embryos all belong to a specific species, so if a human sperm, human egg, and human embryo aren't human, I don't know what you'd call them to distinguish them from their counterparts from other species.
"Isn't a life"?
But we aren't talking about cat IVF, so the distinction isn't needed.
A human embryo is human regardless of whether we're talking about other species or not. So is a human corpse. I've also seen people say an embryo, egg, etc. isn't alive, which is patently false; they can die, so they're alive. Nonhuman beings can't be people, and nonliving things can't be people, but being human and being alive aren't the traits that matter, except as they relate to being a person.
That's why I'm suggesting "not a person" is the right language to use, because we're talking about the concept of personhood, which is what we use to distinguish entities with rights from those without.
Imma be real here, imo, all of what you just said is gobbledygook.
I'm not sure why you felt the need to tell me your command of English is poor, but you do you.
I agree with your point but I hate the way you phrased it. The things you mentioned aren't people, but sperm, eggs, and embryos all belong to a specific species, so if a human sperm, human egg, and human embryo aren't human, I don't know what you'd call them to distinguish them from their counterparts from other species.
"Isn't a life"?
But we aren't talking about cat IVF, so the distinction isn't needed.
A human embryo is human regardless of whether we're talking about other species or not. So is a human corpse. I've also seen people say an embryo, egg, etc. isn't alive, which is patently false; they can die, so they're alive. Nonhuman beings can't be people, and nonliving things can't be people, but being human and being alive aren't the traits that matter, except as they relate to being a person.
That's why I'm suggesting "not a person" is the right language to use, because we're talking about the concept of personhood, which is what we use to distinguish entities with rights from those without.
Imma be real here, imo, all of what you just said is gobbledygook.
I'm not sure why you felt the need to tell me your command of English is poor, but you do you.