The definition of when "life" enters a baby who is in the womb is a challenge for anyone who believes that it is at a different point from conception or at least implantation. The common alternative view is that it is when a baby is "viable". The following story reveals the moving goalposts of this. Of course, if we accept this moving goalpost as a definition, we are bound to eventually find that an artificial womb is created that can sustain life from the moment of conception to birth. It really isn't too difficult to imagine that — after all, all the baby needs is a supply of nutrients and oxygen delivered to its placenta. We have artificial lungs and hearts already, as well as IV feeds. In, say fifty years' time, when such a device has been created, will our secular ethicists start to argue alongside the Christians that a baby developing in the womb is "alive" and deserves protection under law from the very beginning?

"A baby has been born at one day less than 22 weeks gestation, has survived, and is doing well. This birth may have significant ramifications for abortion law because it reduces the time of viability to just over half a normal gestation period. It may impact futile care theory and the occasional attempts to refuse wanted life-sustaining treatment for prematurely born babies. The birth could affect personhood theory, at least for those who refuse to depersonalize born infants, because it could materially alter their moral view of the moral worth of later-stage fetuses. So, welcome to the world, Amillia Sonja Taylor. Your birth might become a significant event for expanding the perception of who qualifies to be in the human family." (Wesley J. Smith, Secondhand Smoke)

If you'd like to read some commentary on the issue, here's the link to NewsBusters that talks about the media's reporting of it.