Let’s assume for the sake of argument that any egg sperm combination is a person (which is not a good assumption given the frequency with which those naturally self abort, the fact that they don’t even have shrimp level brain activity until after week 23, and the definition of living includes the ability to maintain homeostasis which you could make an argument for I guess, it would just be extremely dubious). But for the sake of argument we’re making terrible assumptions. It is illegal to compel others in the USA to donate blood, organs, etc against their will even if it would save someone’s life. For example if I had kidney failure and we were a match I couldn’t make you donate your kidney to me because it would violate your civil rights even at the cost of my life. My mother and father are also not legally obligated to donate their kidney to me. Why do you believe a fetus has the right to violate another persons civil liberty in order to save their life but not an actual living person?
In regards to your second paragraph, you’ll probably find most pro choice people also want to see a reduction in abortion, they just actually believe in using effective means to do so. For example, mandatory comprehensive sex education (which conservatives often oppose) so people do have that knowledge. Expanding health care access so that people have access to cheap / free birth control (where as conservatives put policies in place that make health care less accessible and want to allow employers to exempt birth control from health insurance coverage for “religious beliefs”). Making abortion illegal doesn’t significantly reduce abortions it just makes them more dangerous.
Ok I don't get why you mentioned half of what you said. I think in order for the abortion debate to go anywhere productive, we need a definition on what a life is (by law). You say that for shrimp brain activity doesn't begin until 23 weeks. Ok, what about a human that's in a coma? There's no brain activity there, but there's a chance they can get out of it. Are they no longer considered alive because they're braindead? What about with a heartbeat? Ok clearer, but if you took any CPR/first aid you would know that if you act quick enough it is possible to revive them. If you were either brain dead or your heart stopped, could I stab you and not be imprisoned for it? I would hope to God not. That's why in my opinion conception is the clearest line you can cut without grey area (and you can notice that not once did I mention anything about religion).
As for the notion that it is illegal to compel others to donate blood, organs, etc., ok, where are you going with this? As shitty as it may be that if you're the only person that can save someone and you decide not to, that's your right because that's your body. It's impeccably naive to conflate that with woman and abortions however, so don't even try it. Why? Because what we're talking about is another person with a whole different set of genetics and DNA, that is not the woman my friend. That's another person developing inside that in 99% of cases was by consensual sex. Disregarding marginal cases for just a moment, that was your choice above all else. When you have sex, no matter how much you wanna spin that, you will always run some sort of risk of a baby being produced. Abstinence is the only 100% foolproof way of not producing a baby let alone unwanted pregnancy. So no, the fetus was not and is not violating any civil liberty, most people chose that knowing fully well the possible consequences of their actions.
Now, your last paragraph, I'm not going to speak for all conservatives, I'm only speaking for myself, so let's not conflate that with my argument please. It's great that you want to see a reduction of abortions (or at least I assume so since you brought it up). Is Abortions R Us in NY a great way of going about that, aborting a baby for legitamently any reason at any time until it's entire body is outside the canal during birth? By doing that you're encouraging abortions, and when you turn entire skyscrapers pink, and lie about how it's the woman's body. Yea, that's gonna send the message to encourage abortions. Plenty of celebrities have helped encourage it too, which is sickening. That does not downgrade the value of human life, as much as it may degrade the meaning of human life, I think it is inherently valuable and well worth defending, because the constitution does protect life, liberty, and freedom. As for birth control, sure, no issues there, do what you want. I think the government is bad at running things that the private sector easily can like that, and I don't believe it's smart to use tax dollars for it, but through the free market or even for example what some colleges are doing by providing free condoms, sure. Sex Ed? It's pretty damn smart on the off-chance your kids end up doing it, unless they know the potential consequences and them knowing what you're doing, that ain't my business. Parents have the right to pull their kids out if they so wish, but other than that, not my business.
My problem is not making abortion fully illegal. I'm at least a little more sympathetic towards those who were raped or the mom's life is in danger (Alabama's abortion law is an interesting story, believe it or not
leonard (from big bang theory) and I actually agree on something). There are emergency situations where abortion may be necessary (as much as that does not downplay the fact that a rape-victim's baby is still a life, I can give ground in that she did not have any say or control), and you do not need Planned Parenthood to carry them out either--I absolutely do not want my tax dollars paying for someone else's abortion, thanks. My problem is with this "right" to kill someone willy nilly, it's desperately poor argument to conflate these marginal cases with 99% of abortions (and that ain't even exaggerated). Lets be real here though, if Roe was reversed right here right now, I highly highly highly doubt states like NY or California are gonna reverse their abortion laws. Anything that isn't explicitly stated constitution comes down to state autonomy more than anything else (even though once again, life is in the constitution, but I acknowledge how unlikely that'll change), that was intended. That fact easily translates legislation for abortions. We are not gonna go back to the bloody dark ages either, that's a hilarious overstatement, especially considering my last couple sentences.
