When and where we decide a fertilised egg...becomes a living being is a conceptual arguement that cannot be resolved....and that line could be drawn just about anywhere up to birth .. your position that it is at conception is just that your position...
If someone else decided it is more a part of the womans body...because it is dependent on it and unable to survive without it ...that can just as fairly be their position.
to equate a newly fertilised egg...to a human life...is a conceptual arguement....on the basis of which one could just as easily say a tumour has a right to live...because it has its own mutated dna and is alive and growing in its host.
I would not be so arrogant as to try to tell another where that line is....it is up to them.
as for overturning roe v wade...it is the removal of a national legal precedent....protecting the right to make that choice. maybe consitutionally there is some good basis for them to revert that right to the states but in principal one really had to ask why they have done it.?
