Hello Shoresy,
Nope and this is not a religious issue it is an issue of science we now know that after conception a unique individual with unique DNA is formed and all the genetic building blocks that will ever make up that person for the rest of their lives is already contained within at the moment of conception, that's science deal with it.
It is a huge religious issue.
It is also well studied in science.
It can be both.
Unique DNA happens all the time. Most of it never makes it to adulthood.
There is nothing unique about human DNA. DNA is in all life.
An ant has DNA. We murder them by the millions.
A human at the point of conception is one cell.
It is absurd that this single cell should prevail over the host being in a legal sense. The host being can produce more cells. The host being has the ability to consider the repercussions of the decision of whether to continue to be the host being or to halt that process before it turns into a life-altering lifetime obligation. The single cell zygote can't even think. It has no brain. It doesn't even have a sex. It is next to nothing.
The question then becomes how far along should the zygote / embryo / fetus go before we as a society say it is wrong/illegal to abort it. At the beginning, it should logically be the decision of the host being over a single cell. At the point of birth, it becomes murder to kill another separate individual human. But up until birth, it is part of the host being.
If the health of the host being or the fetus is threatened, a medical intervention is obviously warranted.
If the fetus cannot possibly survive outside of the host being, it is still logical that the host being should prevail in the decision to continue or not.
It only becomes less justifiable to allow that if things have progressed too far.