Neal Matson - That's a false equivalence - a logical fallacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence)  in which two opposing arguments appear to be logically equivalent when in fact they are not. You select a singular common trait (life) and build an argument that if we don't race to save the multiple eggs instead of the crying baby, we really don't believe in life at conception. To arrive at that conclusion, you must ignore all other attributes of the chooser.

The eggs aren't crying and pulling on the chooser's heart strings. Human beings, being emotional beings, naturally gravitate toward the living child. Caring for a crying baby is written into our DNA, going back 100s of millennia, while fertilized eggs have existed mere decades. Choosing the crying child over the eggs doesn't mean our belief in life beginning at conception is diminished. It just means we're more emotionally attached to an actual crying baby.