Joe Carter on the definition of personhood

I've been reading Joe Carter's thoughts on the beginning of life in order to address his position that personhood human life begins at conception. I've catalogued the most salient pieces here, for the purposes of memory and to allow others to access the full range of his arguments. (It would also be an easy way for Mr. Carter to point others to the sum of his own work. You're welcome in advance.)

Update: Carter notes,

To clarify, what I would argue is that what begins at conception is a new human being and the inherent value of that being, its human dignity.

The first is a simple brute fact of biology while the second is the implication of being made in the image of God and being the property of our Creator. While I find the concept of "personhood" valuable and useful, I think it becomes problematic when used to determine bioethical questions of life and death. Personhood, like rights, has become something that must be given or at least recognized by society rather something that is inherent and inalienable. I find this to be one of the most dangerous ideas in history.

Point taken, and the post is revised to reflect Carter's clarified thinking.

Being a Person: Why Personhood is Not Enough

Hype and Hypocrisy: Kinsley, IVF, and Embryo Destruction

The Embryo Eaters: Part I -- A Bioethical Thought Experiment
The Embryo Eaters: Part 2 -- PZ Myers and McEmbryos

Analogies and Artifacts: Can Embryonic Stem Cell Research be Morally Acceptable?
Analogies and Artifacts: Can Embryonic Stem Cell Research be Morally Acceptable? (Part II)

Fertilization or Implantation?: Reconsidering the “Morning-After Pill”
Fertilization or Implantation?: Pt. II -- The Case for Conception