Not me. Bizarre idea. A newborn has no empathy and lacks object permanence (an object only exists in a baby's mind when it is actually seeing it). A newborn can certainly feel pain. We really can't know the extent of their emotions beyond them learning to mimic our facial expressions. A person in a coma (even a medically induced one) has none of the qualities you mentioned. There's a lot of debate on exactly when a human fetus can feel pain; with pro-abortion researchers strenuously defending the beginning of the third trimester. However, we can't be sure. We can be sure it reacts to touch at 8 weeks and appears to retreat from stimulus that would be painful to an adult about this same time. Should this not be a case of tie goes to the runner? You clearly don't support infanticide but your fundamental definition of personhood has some issues. Empathy is certainly a trait that defines the best of humanity - but check with a psychologist on this; it's a gradual process. Children are typically three before they begin to notice and understand the emotions of others. As early as two, well socialized kids will show signs that they have internalized their parent's habits - but not with any consistency - it is more a response to familiar stimuli. Awareness has similar issues. Awareness of what? Themselves as a being in space and time? Others? Their basic needs? Physical sensation? Children and the very old, as well as people with TBIs (Hell, even pre-speech acquiring Hellen Keller) may have issues here. Now in the case of the old and the injured you may well argue that those people had personhood before and are "grandfathered" in. But on what basis other than arbitrary whim or philosophical convenience does one make that argument? If personhood can be gained, does it not stand to reason it can be lost? And if it can, why not allow those burdened with their care from unloading that burden? You still haven't expressed an exact point in time when a person becomes a person. Is that point birth? Third trimester, second trimester? When? I could really care less what is legal or illegal. There's no law against coming home from work and verbally berating your spouse; that doesn't make it moral. It's not a waste of time to have a dialogue on anything. You have no idea who may be convinced by what argument at what time. You have no idea who might read what you write and say nothing about it. I've moved on this issue considerably since my youth, due largely to being exposed to good arguments that were backed up by observation. A matter of principle I think 9th and 10th amendments should be taken seriously which means just about everything decided by the federal government should instead be decided by the states.