Well maybe your definition of 'human' is wrong. Ever thought about that? Maybe 'human' is defined as 'conception-to-fetus-to-baby-to-adult-to-death', the entire cycle. Worth some thought.

Does that affect its humanity?

Well, a baby is less sentient (and more dependent on others) than an adult: does that make it less human? Logic.

K so, the general consensus seems to be that fetuses aren't fully human, thus, killing them is not morally (or legally) wrong, correct? Well. Time to learn some shit.
Is killing an adult (legally) any different from killing a baby? Spoiler alert: the answer is 'no'. It's murder either way. So: What is the difference between an adult and a baby? There are only two differences: size and level of development. Now: what's the difference between a baby and a fetus? Size, and level of development. If those two factors don't legally make a difference between an adult and a baby, why should they make a legal difference between killing a baby and a fetus?
You can keep telling yourselves that human fetuses aren't human; I'll stick with science and logic.

So you're saying that because the fetus is underdeveloped, it isn't human? In the example in the post, when someone breaks an eagle egg, it's still considered 'killing an endangered eagle', correct? What I'm trying to ask is, what makes a human any less human for being less developed?

:)

I'm implying that the movies were almost as good.

[negating-conditional perfect] y'all'dn't've (y'all shouldn't have).

Extended edition, mofo.

I KNOW! What the fuck? Skin colour is only important when it's a minority doing something, apparently. I guarantee, if the kid was white, the colour wouldn't be mentioned. I call this 'reverse racism'. #EndReverseRacism #AllLivesMatter

Don't think so, but this post is about the films. I think the Freda-and-her-brother scene was made up entirely for the film's plot advancement.