Elective abortion (and access to this) is a pretty complex consideration. I tend to oppose any simplistic declaration.
Being for minimizing the perceived need for such seems the best strategy to me. Employ any reasonable strategy to help folks not wanting a baby to avoid undesired conception.
Still, even if we collectively did this the best we could, some folks will find themselves (or their partner) unintentionally and undesirably pregnant.
So what to do?
Some things seem clear, I think.
1. Of course human life begins at conception. That's basic biology.
2. Elective abortion clearly ends a human life that would have (in the vast majority of cases) gone on to develop into a baby, child, and so forth.
3. All human life is not equally valued or valuable (worth the effort to protect/preserve/maintain/sustain). Never has been, never will be (anticipated protestations acknowledged but not believed to be persuasive). The only question is whose valuation matters most? And what protections do we encode into our laws?
One question is how do we as a society define a "person"? Meaning a human with rights. Such as to life, etc. Yes this diverging of an always more narrowly defined "person" from "human" clearly opens (intentionally) the way to a denial of certain rights for humans not judged to have legal standing as a "person". If this seems contorted, it makes more sense, to me, than attempting to pretend that all humans are not really humans. Better to just make up the category of "natural person". With respect to elective abortion, societies that permit this more highly value the rights of the pregnant woman than that of the developing human she carries. They tend to see her as a "person" with rights and not so (or much less so) the embryo or fetus.
Anyhow, for a long time I've felt being "anti-abortion" was probably about the only remaining issue with which I (mostly) side with "conservatives". It's weird, however, and does seem highly hypocritical that those opposed to legal access to elective abortions seem (generally) otherwise hell bent on not caring collectively (via governance) for either pregnant women, poor children, and born humans (generally).
Likewise, it seems weird to me that "liberals" (and progressives) favor all sorts of programs designed to help the vulnerable but seem to often breezily dismiss any concerns about the very vulnerable (to elective abortion) developing humans in utero.
Of course it boils down to whose (and what) rights are we prioritizing.
I certainly think in modern times we should be able to find a way to collectively support moms and children and families such that the "inconvenience" of an unwanted or unplanned pregnancy could be minimized. But, again, look who demurs from and disparages such efforts and nearly every turn--"pro life" (cough) folks.
And yes, for me, the "solution" of elective abortion, the intentional ending of an inconvenient human life, indeed raises concerns over the potential to spill over into collective devaluing of other inconvenient human lives.
The issue has been such a galvanizing force for conservative Christians (and thus Republicans who decided decades ago to cater to them) that it's really a singularly determinative consideration for many Republicans.
But for myself, I decided some time ago that Republicans are so far gone down a pathway characterized by dishonest, dishonorable, and destructive power (and fear) mongering that there are just too many more important and relevant issues relating to how we treat born humans, with Republicans essentially uniformly on the wrong side of these, that I can no longer support Republicans (generally).
Sigh.
[sorry to post this probably barely coherent screed and go away but I have to for a while.]
