The second article talks about how it is in no right a woman's choice to take the life of an unborn child at any time during the pregnancy and should be considered murder. The author is a professional pathologist and is also very religious and uses God in his argument claiming that it is not people who make life but God so, we people have no choice to take the life of said child.
The first article was the more convincing one. Using scientific facts and logic convinced me that a zygote was not completely human yet and was merely a potential human not an actual human. The second article relied too much on religion and emotion to be effective towards me, more scientific facts could have been used. Especially since the author was a pathologist.
I have always had a mixed feeling on abortion, I have always felt that under certain circumstances it should be legal but in other cases illegal. I understand that legally it would be almost impossible to control what the cutoff would be. The articles did not really change my stance at all I still believe that abortion should be situational and I wish there was some way of reviewing each separate situation and analyzing them but in all reality this would be costly. So, I remain unchanged in my stance on abortion.