Look, you've got your standard, and I've got mine. The only way we can go any further is for me to convince you that a blastocyst isn't a person, or for you to convince me that it is. And I don't think either of those is going to happen.
I agree it would be impossible to go further on the abortion topic at this time.
I cannot convince you that it is a person when you indicate you do not know what personhood is. You have indicated it is too complicated to provide a definiton, despite it being your standard. Since you cannot define your standard, it cannot be applied to any particular.
And if you don't know what a person is, it would be difficult to convince me that it is not a person as well.
BTW, that "really" comment was at your apparent idea that I was somehow claiming women aren't responsible for anything.
Yes, I gathered that the "really" response was in regards to that. I was clarifying based on the article you posted, and some of your responses. It is not normally something I would think a person would hold to, but if you did hold to it then it would save time in the discussion to figure that out right away. And, one never knows, people hold all kinds of views on this site.
Now you seem to have clarified the point, and I will take your response to indicate that it is not at all the case.
But with that reason ruled out, there is still the question of why it is that you hold two people engaged together in the same act to different standards, holding one fully responsible, and the other not responsible at all.
Since we are not making any further progress on the abortion issue, no need to continue the clarification.
But if you ever decide to post that article as its own thread, and discuss your reasons for holding the man and woman engaged in consensual sex to different standards in regards to responsibility in a thread, I would likely join the discussion.