I consider a) preventing someone from getting an abortion b) forcing an abortion on someone*, c) misleading people to think a pre-birth human is not yet a person, AND d) misleading people to think that abortion is inherently wrong, to ALL be heinous acts that are unequivocally as bad as second-degree murder( or worse), morally, and if I had my druthers the law would treat them as such.

Abortion IS, and should ALWAYS be regarded and referred to as, a choice between whatever the pregnant person's personal cost of carrying to term is, and the cost to that person of choosing to end another human life. And since both of those things are entirely relative to that person's experience and NO ONE ELSE's, either choice should be sacrosanct.( The fertilized egg/blastocyst/zygote/embryo/fetus IS a human person, just as much as severely disabled individuals are, but does not yet have a perspective and thus need not be consulted; and in this matter said person ought only be considered at all by the bearer on whom it is dependent, NOT by those who aren't subject to _direct_ *biological* effects of the pregnancy in question.)

Seeing as I was given up for adoption shortly after birth, I think my perspective on this carries more weight than most men's: because in order to take this stance, I have to acknowledge that my own existence may be a consequence of an atrocity. And as someone living in the 21st century, when AI may attain consciousness, and as a person on the autism spectrum( albeit relatively high-functioning), it's important to me to say that personhood should not be biologically determined, nor wholly on capacity. It's a matter of known potential, and realistically also a matter of relationships. It can't exist in a vacuum and can be inferred in the absence of evidence.

I do accept and acknowledge that my views, while logically unimpeachable, can only make sense to those who accept that other forms of euthanasia are killing but not wrong( e.g., assisted suicide, removing life support, etc.). Anyone working from a conflicting axiom, such as the belief that life or the duration thereof is always more important than quality of life, cannot comprehend my premise.

*and yes; being a company that can afford to offer paid parental leave but prioritizes other investments ABSOLUTELY counts as forcing an abortion on someone; so does impregnating a person without consent; as also does being a medical qualified and choosing to selectively provide information or ultimately refusing to perform abortion( unless the doctor has a close personal or familial relationship to the pregnant person or impregnator); so too does being a government entity which collects taxes but fails to provide full support for abortion or neglects to facilitate adoption for those who do not wish to be parents but cannot bear to abort, unless said government has proactively provided/offered free birth control( including post-coital) & relevant education to a pregnant person who became impregnated during consensual activities; among many other circumstances.