Its shocking indeed because of the personal values we hold. We have been conditioned to feel this way by society and by our biological dispositions, but this has nothing whatever to say with regard to the rationality of this view.
As a father of a one year old, your child should not have human rights, but ought to be seen as your property. Not the property of the state. Because an open society is desirable (another long argument which need not be made at this point), individualism is to be promoted over collectivism, for this reason it is better that the state be given little control over the lives of individuals than a lot. Thus, the outcome of his life until he becomes legally human is in your hands. I have given an argument for why my definition of what 'human' is should be accepted. Again, the fact that many people find it shocking is irrelevant.
Then what would you call killing someone else's one year old child? Vandalism?
:It is a matter of a carefully contrived argument.
Of which, I believe you are flawed in clearly. If you think it's the right way of doing so, go on and try to pass such a law. If babies make me FEEL like they are humans, than that is what I shall in turn think when I debate. Just because you think babies shouldn't have human rights, it doesn't mean they won't. Like I said.. the laws are in place to protect those until they can protect themselves.. your theory would destroy those protections.