@Thejoyfulstar Around 70 to 75% of all fertilised eggs end in a period. Most 'conceptions' are not viable. Therefore it is actually invalid to argue for life from conception. It is only a 'viable' conception if implanted in the uterine wall. You can argue that life begins at implantation. You can't argue it begins at conception. Because that would make only 20-25% of conceptions valid.
Regardless, the bottom line is that the life of the born, actual, existing human must always, always trump something with no sentience, no heartbeat, no brainstem, and no nervous system.
Because to argue the opposite to that is to argue for Gestational Slavery. To argue a woman is not even, and only an incubator, a broodmare. With no human rights at all whatsoever.
Regardless of your position on life begins at implantation or conception, you cannot deny that an actual person's life must not be forced into servitude or stripped of human rights. No one can deny that a woman, in fact men too, must have rights to bodily autonomy. We cannot even remove people's organs from a deceased person, a corpse, to donate without prior consent. The same with forcing someone to give someone a kidney. Or donate blood or marrow.
To force a woman into gestational servitude against her will renders a woman with less right than a CORPSE. It's only blind ideology that would stop you seeing the real human reality that is. That women have less human rights, than a corpse. If that doesn't wake a lot of people up, then the ideological dogma and stubbornness is far too strong to prevent them from seeing actual real life effects of their ideological argument.