I think it's pretty clear what we have here:
Liberal Point of View (aka useful idiot talking point): a "fetus" is a parasite that exclusively afflicts women. This parasite is subject to destruction at the whims of a woman, and this right is protected by the woman's right to "privacy". The parasite has absolutely no right to life until it leaves the woman's body and takes its first breath. The fact that it would become a child "but for" the abortion is irrelevant. The logical consequence of a woman's failure to exercise self control and self care is a government provided medical procedure.
All other people: killing an unborn child is wrong
I'm having a hard time determining where you come down on the issue.
It's only okay it under certain limited circumstances. It's not a carte blanche to freefuck the whole world and then abort at will b/c you "don't feel like it"
Like most things, it's not black and white
And see, this is where I think you're wrong. It's a pretty simple argument and it comes down to this: Is "it" a human or isn't it? Obviously, if it is, then "aborting" it is murder and is never okay. The only exception is a (extremely rare) self-defense scenario, in which the birth would kill the mother. Either it's a human or it's not. If it is, abortion should be illegal under all circumstances (except self defense). If it's not, it's permissible.
The question, then, is when it becomes human. That is, there has to be some exact point where the "clump of cells" becomes a "human." That point determines the permissibility of abortion. This is pretty profound stuff, when you consider that prior to this exact point, it's morally permissible, and after this exact point, it's murder.
Any other talking point is superfluous imo.
