nt

The vast majority of eggs that are fertilized never result in a successful pregnancy. They don't implant and just pass out with the period. Is that murder just by virtue of the fact that a woman is female? (another issue).

But if a single-cell zygote is a person, and at any given time it is safe to assume that a sexually active woman, especially one without birth control, likely has a zygote inside her at some time during the year, shouldn't she be able to claim those zygotes as dependents on the 1040? They may need to expand section 6c because due to the uncertainty, she could potentially have 12 dependents per year that never result in a full-term birth or even a hint of pregnancy.

But if we're going to consider zygotes as having all of the rights of those who are born, they should at least be considered dependents for tax purposes. Perhaps we can use the statistics of Schrödinger, given that the monthly egg is in two states at once, and split the difference by allowing six dependents per year for sexually active women. That would amount to $22,200 per year (2011 rate) in tax deductions just for the zygotes. I guess we could go with a single check box, "Are you a sexually active woman?" and give a $22,200 deduction if you check "yes". Ya think the GOP would go for that?

But wait, that won't help the 1% very much - they don't get laid very often, if ever.

beyond them.