The thing that bothers me witless is the thought of foetal suffering. So long as there's assurance that this doesn't occur (eg no brain stem), I am thinking a woman's right to choose is more important than someone's wish to impose their will on others - however well-intentioned and protective their purpose. But thereafter, I'm pretty much against it (with those few exceptions, but not including rape as the decision can reasonably occur within the first trimester).
I didn't realise this but this is apparently the guidance in the UK. 90% of all abortions are performed in the first 12 weeks. But I also agree that the abortion limit (24 weeks) is too far into a pregnancy for personal choice to be the only principle in play.
"Almost 90% of UK abortions are performed within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. During this time there is no scientific doubt that the developing fetus is incapable of any form of conscious awareness. The fetal brain does not begin to develop until 3-4 weeks into the pregnancy, at which point it is little more than a hollow tube filled with dividing neurons. Between weeks 4 and 8 this neural tissue grows forming the major divisions of the adult brain (forebrain, midbrain, hindbrain and spinal cord). By 8 weeks recognisable facial features have developed and the cerebral cortex separates into two distinct hemispheres. By the end of the first trimester (12 weeks) nerve cells are beginning to form rudimentary connections between different areas of the brain. However, these connections are sparse and incapable of performing the same functions as an adult brain. So by 12 weeks, although the fetus is certainly starting to look like a little human, the neural circuits responsible for conscious awareness are yet to develop." http://thebrainbank.scienceblog.com/2012/12/04/what-can-science-add-to-the-abortion-debate/
One thing I should point out is that it isn't really possible to argue an assertion. You have a belief about your definition of life's origin and how that is the important step along the road. I respect it. But people can reasonably have other definitions - like me and the Supreme Court, who think that the obligations change as the pregnancy progresses. A fertilised egg is a different thing than a perfectly formed, baby-shaped, pre-birth humanoid. I have a different type of concern for the one over the other - primarily because a pre-birth baby has a functioning brain.
For myself, I'd prefer women to consider adoption rather than abortion. But I am also not willing to oblige a woman to carry a baby to term that she doesn't want, so long as she makes that decision responsibly within a defined period.
| 
