New Legislation
First, let me note that 7 other states plus DC already had similar laws in place to the ones that NY just passed. Some of them are merely ratifying at the state level what has been, or is, legal at the federal level (out of concern that the Supreme Court might overturn Roe v. Wade at some point.
Those states are Alaska, Colorado, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon and 
Vermont (plus DC).
Virginia is another state that is in the process of making these movements in abortion law. Here is the conversation that was going on in the last 24 hours, for example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJ5sTEzHO_k
Issue 1.
As I mentioned above, I think a moral and biblical argument might could made in the case of abortion when the life of the mother is at risk. However, the language of this provision is for limitless “late-term abortions when a woman’s health is endangered.”
Notice “woman” not “mother”; and “health” not “life”.
As I understand it, “Health” has been used to apply to almost any condition in a person’s life legally. Mental anguish, anxiety, fatigue and other less-than-life threatening issues. The language in the law before had indicated “life of a woman.”
The sad fact is that the national standard has been “life or health” for a long time. This wording is new in New York, but not overall.
Issue 2.
This is the most important change brought about by these laws, and one that I thought I 
saw coming a year or two ago (I think).
The change in the literal terms of the debate.
“Life” or “alive” is too easy a term to define clearly.
As people began to point out that a single celled organism found on the bottom of the sea or that would be found in a pool on Mars would certainly be “life” discovered in a new place, the defense of a complex, multi-celled organism with a heartbeat, brain waves, pain responses, etc., not being alive, becomes absurd.
So I figured that the pro-choice world would turn to a different word to deny unborn children. At the time, my guess was “person.”
Reports are that now, a person is “a human being who is born and is alive.”
This means that an unborn human being is no longer legally a “person” and therefore does not have any rights under NY State Law. Potentially, none.
A child, who has been alive for 10 months, thinks, feels, hears, sees, dreams, etc. is, by this law, not a person – not recognized as a person – and no laws apply to them at all.
The power to determine when someone is a person is God-like power. By what possible standard must a human be born to be a person? Notice how “a human being who is alive” isn’t sufficient? That is because everyone knows that a fetus is alive. So, since we do not want a fetus to have any rights under law, we strip it of its person-hood by arbitrarily saying that the child must complete a hurdle before we allow it to be a person… and then, if that weren’t enough, we deny it the freedom to achieve that hurdle.
This is a terrifying step, and of the three lethal issues, the most dangerous for all person alive today. Know that there are people willing to redefine “person” to achieve political goals.
Who doesn’t get to be a person next?
Of course, a consequence of this is that it no longer is medical professionals alone who are allowed to perform abortions in NY. Sure enough, this is part of the change as well. I immediately wondered, “why not?” If an unborn child, not a person, has no protection, then anyone can perform an abortion. So long as they do no damage to the mother, what law would they be breaking?
After so many years of anger about “back-alley” abortions, it seems that they will be back in NY as now nurse practitioners, physicians’ assistants, and midwives will be able to perform abortions.
Issue 3.
Birth has a new definition, too. We have to make sure that the hurdle a child must leap over to get to protect its life is as narrowly defined as possible.
According to Politifact, live birth is defined as “the complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of a product of conception, irrespective of the duration of pregnancy, which, after such separation, breathes or shows any other evidence of life such as beating of the heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, whether or not the umbilical cord has been cut or the placenta is attached; each product of such a birth is considered live born.”
My first-born son had to be spanked to get him to clearly breath. I don’t know if he had any of these other signs, but as many have pointed out, now, in New York, you are not a person until your breath or your heart beats… even if you have left the womb.
I think these three issues are the ones Christians especially need to be aware of. I know that I am overdue for doing a larger write-up of a defense of the sanctity of life at conception, and it will happen one day.
But I say that a person is someone created in the Image of God… and that would be all humans regardless of sex, ethnicity, age, developmental stage, or disability.
Mark 12:17. Give to God what is God’s.
Sources
https://buffalonews.com/2019/01/22/long-stalled-abortion-bill-passes-new-york-legislature/
https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/overview-abortion-laws
Thank you for analyzing and informing your readers on this sadly controversial subject with intelligence and integrity. Your definition of “person” is inarguably perfect…your practical wisdom a gift from the author of life…and the truth you stated in utmost simplicity is confirmed by the Spirit of the living God.
Human beings, persons, are worth investing in, no matter what stage of life and development. Thanks for the encouragement!