Like with any other matter, I do not believe it is the place of the Government to dictate morality... since it cannot do so anyway. All it can do is make things fair. In this case, we must decide whether it can in any way be fair to very directly intervene with a woman's right to her own body and decisions about her healthcare (in a way which men can not experience) for the sake of what is not human life but POTENTIAL human life, and where that line can be drawn.
One insane bill suggested that life be defined as beginning after a woman's last menstruation before becoming pregnant... which is first of all completely retarded on multiple levels, secondly is useless, and thirdly disregards the fact that it is perfectly possible for a woman to experience what may seem to be normal menstrual activity even during pregnancy.
Another, generally satiric, suggestion was that all human reproductive cells should be viewed as potential human life, making such things as masturbation in males and normal menstruation in females to be on par with murder.

Now, on a more logical basis, take an example such as a woman who has received IVF and has become pregnant with more fertilized eggs than expected (as occurred with the infamous Octomom). While the risks of pregnancy, especially multiple, have been greatly reduced with modern medicine there is still significant risk to the pregnant woman and VERY significant risk to her offspring. In order to better ensure a successful pregnancy it would be in best interest to either remove some of the embryos or to start again from scratch to hope for a better result. I suppose that would be murder... but would that not also make it manslaughter to allow that pregnancy to continue regardless, even knowing that it was possible if not likely that most or all of the embryos would fail because of it?

And on an even more logical basis, how many pregnancies fail all the time, intended or not, due to no unnatural causes whatsoever? Should a woman who has miscarried repeatedly be prevented from trying again because she is killing a potential human being? Should women who become pregnant unknowingly and eventually miscarry also be punished for killing a potential human? I mean, if we're going to say that abortion is not just killing but MURDER, the same rules must apply to all forms of death when that particular "victim" is involved.

I'm sorry , but all of those are ridiculous (figure of speech, I'm not really sorry). To me it comes down to a sort of sense of value and investment. A human that has lived even for a few months has had an immense amount of time, emotion, and resources invested in it. Over the course of years this really adds up. This is not to say that it is not possible to be invested in a potential child prior to birth, nor is it to say that women who choose to abort have not done so, but the sheer amount of time and effort that goes into a human postpartum is so far above and beyond that... or it well should be.

A separate but related point of disgust for me is that many of the pro-life attitudes correlate with other stances which support devaluing and even actively harming humans which were, at one time, an embryo or fetus no different from the very ones they think they are protecting. That somehow through either innate traits not always clear prenatally or through choices made in life they have somehow surrendered the rights which these people seem to think are so desperately vital as to literally override a woman's right to her own life is such complete bullshit even I don't have words for it.

Therefore, to say that a woman who becomes pregnant is less valuable than the parasitic blob of cells inside her which may or may not, without outside intervention, become another human is filth. That woman was a fetus too, since when does SHE not have a right to life as well? Whether it is "selfish" to not "want" to be "inconvenienced" with an unwanted pregnancy for the remainder of the time (let alone the biological and social consequences thereof) is no one's concern but her own. A human's rights can NEVER extend into the body of another human. You cannot force someone who has an organ which could save another's life to give that organ to them. If that other human dies because of a lack of donation it is not the potential donor's LEGAL responsibility. Whether it is their MORAL responsibility to do so is irrelevant. You cannot enforce morality.
The same applies here. You cannot FORCE a woman to use her organs to shelter a potential human. It is a literal violation of her most innate human right, to be the sole owner of her own body and do with it as she wills. You can call her whatever, you can try to convince her, you can offer her resources which might change her mind, but ultimately the decision must be hers because she is her own no matter what else is effected.