You're right, that is silly. It is a silly, misleading straw-man argument.
Sentience isn't and never was the test. People in long-term comas still have rights.
Also, it's hard to define precisely, harder to test in new-born infants, who are not all that "wired up" anyway at the time of birth.
It's the fundamental point in the debate, so it's far from a trick question?
b) As Mr Buttigieg said, ""If it's that late in your pregnancy, then almost by definition, you've been expecting to carry it to term" - engage with that instead of repeating yourself?
c) As the other commenter (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31892643) says, this is a nonsense hypothetical
> One singular example of an abortion at 39 weeks where the mother didn't want the baby. I guarantee you can't actually find one even though you claim it exists
> It's the fundamental point in the debate
It is not, or should not be.
> believe there is a point ... shouldn't be allowed.
Again, should be a medical decision between patient and doctor, not a legal one, and not a numeric comparison.
Otherwise, we're pretending sentience is magically conveyed as the baby passes through the birth canal, which is silly.