The fetus doesn’t feel pain prior to 24 weeks, says the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecolocists in the UK. But the language in the media report isn’t entirely convincing, which leads me to believe the language in the report itself isn’t convincing:
This could mean that late abortions, which are permitted for serious abnormalities or risks to the mother’s health, may not result in foetal suffering.
Not exactly saying “Without a shadow of a doubt, the fetus feels absolutely nothing!”
Here’s the thing. With wanted babies, we are told science shows us that babies are learning in the womb. That prior to birth they are listening to their mothers voices. Responding to cues in their environment. This is a valid stream of secular, non-abortion related (therefore, unpolarized) science, too.
Something’s gotta give.
by 
Yeah, you can’t have it both ways. The doctor who performed in utero surgery on that famous baby Samuel, also performed abortions in the same hospital on a different floor. He himself said that doctors cannot live with that dichotomy for much longer.
I’m still missing the part where it’s okay to harm someone just because they can’t feel pain. I mean really . . . if Christopher Reeve was still around, would it be okay to knock him off? He couldn’t feel pain. Especially while he was taking a nap (after all, he’d be unconscious!)?
I think the pain/conscious argument is kind of a moot point to me. Its like saying an invasively harmful act upon someone is only wrong if you get caught-its only wrong if the person who is recieving the harm, notices the harm and expresses their non-consent. When I was younger I would steal money from my mom’s purse but we couldn’t argue that that stealing wasn’t wrong that time because she didn’t notice that her possession was missing.