re: All the talk on Roe V. Wade

Although I consider myself libertarian, I don't see the "party line" as particularly relevant to our discussion. Where we're at is agreeing (I think) that infants have a positive and the accompanying negative right to life. The point of contention is that I believe those rights should extend to a fetus all the way back to fertilization and you do not.

My reasoning is that the negative right to life is bestowed "because human" and the positive right to life is incumbent upon the person with responsibility over that child to provide. That responsibility begins at the creation of the new human life (fertilization) although it may eventually be transferred.

Your reasoning for the arbitrary negation of the positive right to life prior to birth is yet unclear to me. If you would posit that the fetus or zygote isn't human, I would say that is ascientific, and no more true than claiming it is a giraffe. If you intend to take a position vis a vis sentience or self awareness, I will preemptively point out that you're going to be denying the personhood of many full grown adults.