The answer to the question is obvoius...pro-lifers don't like the word becaues it appears to dehumanize the fetus as some kind of emotionally hollow word that takes care to call it every name BUT child, humna, person, etc.
I don't think ZEF's wrong, I don't think "Child" is wrong...I do'nt think either are necessarily MORE correct, it largely just depends on the individuals view point and hte context in which they're speaking.
In a way I'll think of it like someone building a boat.
In the early stages they may just have a frame that's made up of a few boards. It's hardly something that could be called a "boat" in a general term. It's not going to go out and float on water, carry anything/anybody, etc. At that point really it's nothing more than "Wood" or a "Support Structure" or "Frame (Lets call it WSF). At the same time, it's still clearly a boat that's being built. It's end point will be a fully workable boat. It's purpose and only real directoin it's going to go is towards being a boat. Even if it may not directly look like a boat at that time, it's not hard to see it and understand that's what its building up to become. It's not a seperate thing, it's just the early stages of that boat. And thus many would still refer to that basic wooden frame as the "boat" that is being built/worked on even though it may not be a "boat" yet.
Some people strictly want to term the things as they are at the IMMEDIETE moment in the most technical sense possible...some people prefer to term things trhoughout a process as the thing it ultimately is and will be. Neither are inherently incorrect.
Both sides, by and large, use the words they use for political reasons that they dress up and pretend and rationalize away into other reasons but really the truth of the matter comes down to their political motivations. There's a reason I've never heard the word ZEF EVER used by anyone who isn't either routinely arguing about abortion OR during actual abortoin debates. The vast majority of people who use it aren't scientists always worried about speaking in the most medically or scientifically relevant way in all cases, they're people with a political view and who have a strong desire to push their vie wand attack their opponents.
Pro-Lifer's use "Child" because they want to humanize the fetus and enhance the emotional attachment to it felt by undecided folks
Pro-Choicers use "ZEF" becaues they want to dehumanize the fetus and reduce the emotional attachments to it felt by undecided folks
Both try to make up other reasons and justifications and excuses for their use, but that's really what it comes down to in the end.
Zyphlin, I see your perspectives on the "child" - "ZEF" issue (humanizing v. dehumanizing as trying to mix a perception of what an unborn is verse the application of common scientific/medical vernacular.
Pro-birth and pro-life uses "CHILD" because they believe it to literally be the equivalent as a BORN CHILD.
Pro-Choice use the "acronym" of ZEF for Zygote - Embryo-Fetus, which are genuine terms used to identify physiological stages, which are used to inject in discussion which are more definitive in nature to stages of development of an unborn
Notice the two sentences of your post, which are highlighted in red.
I suggest that the use of "child" by pro-birth and pro-life is more commonly used in a much more complicated way than in the way you construct your point. The most common use of that word in abortion debates is: Innocent Child in the Womb.
Pro-Birth and Pro-Life have failed to support the claim and use of "innocent
child in the womb" argument based on the true physiological development stages taught in every higher education institution. This is the most used description of the unborn. But it's a two-fold issue.
Firstly, using the word, "innocent" is not an applicable word or term when describing a Zygote - Embryo - Fetus. Why? Let's look at the literal definition of "innocent":
in·no·cent
Adjective
1) Not guilty of a crime or offense.
Noun
An innocent person, in particular.
Synonyms
guiltless - harmless - naive - guileless - ingenuous
It is virtually impossible for a Zygote - Embryo -Fetus to engage in the any behaviors that qualify them to be judged as any of the above. The words used in the definition of "innocent"...apply to persons who are born and interact with other born persons who engage in behaviors which have created the need to established words to describe a more specific nature of certain behaviors.
There are no behaviors being engaged in within a womb, which warrants the actions of a Zygote - Embryo - Fetus to be applied to interactions between events or born persons that can be identified as innocent or guilty of anything we "necessarily use" in a variety of social ways.
The "lack of a specific behavior or engaging in a specific behavior" is usually linked to the role of one's relationship to some event.
A Zygote - Embryo - Fetus plays no role in any events, which would identify its behavior as innocent or guilty.
CHILD LABEL...is the most obvious misuse of the word in Pro-Birth and Pro-Life's description of a Zygote - Embryo - Fetus. They simply refuse to accept the scientific/medical terminology used to describe the stages, which occur from conception to birth of the unborn.
Without these terminologies...it would be impossible for science/medical researchers to do the types of empirical studies that they do to advance our knowledge of our existence at all developmental stages....from conception...to death of natural causes resulting from old age adult born beings.
The only concession that Pro-Choice might consider when using the "acronym" ZEF is: ZEFTF (Zygote - Embryo - First Term Fetus) or ZESTF (Zygote - Embryo - Second Term Fetus) or ZETTF (Zygote - Embryo - Third Term Fetus).