A lot of readers are getting hung up on this statement by me: “But I don’t think he would disagree that the question of when life begins is a moral one.” For example:

Mr Goldberg,
You are quite correct in saying that the issue of when ‘human life’ begins is essentially a moral one. This is because ‘human life’ in this context is really synonymous with: ‘life that deserves the moral status of a human person’. Science, being amoral, can not tell us anything about when something should acquire a moral status.
On the other hand, there are certain empirical characteristics that people might believe are evidence of this moral status, such as the ability to respond to stimulus or experience pain, or even the ability to develop into an organism capable of those things. Science can inform our knowledge of when these characteristics are present, but the decision to give weight to any particular characteristic is a moral, not scientific, choice.

Me: I think I’ll simply confess error and say I stand corrected. If I had it do over again, I think I’d write “But I don’t think he would disagree that the question of when ‘personhood’ begins is a moral one.” When life begins is essentially a scientific question.