If that works for great philosohoical thought in your world, I am indeed stumped.
Not philosophical. It is an identification of the facts. A fetus is every bit an appendage as a person's intestines are an appendage. They are both the property of the woman. All appendages have unique identifiable characteristics that differentiate it from all other appendages. Likewise, many appendages have some similarities. jwalsh07 noted some of the characteristics that uniquely differentiate the fetus appendage from other appendages. A definitive characteristic of all human appendages is that -- baring medical intervention -- when the person dies so do all their appendages always die with the person. Yet when an appendage dies the person sometimes dies. An appendage is the property of the person that grew the appendage.
No it is not. And you seem to be the only person who thinks it is.
You dote on the similarities, but ignore the differences. The differences are not small or passing. They are substantial enough that the entire field of medicine - regardless of their personal opinions about abortion - recognizes a fetus as a distinct human life, rather than an appendage of its mother. They are distinct enough that even a rabidly pro-abortion philosopher like Peter Singer - who advocates not just abortion, but also euthenasia of born children, the sick, and the infirm - admits the basic humanity of the fetus. They are substantial enough that your argument amounts to lunatic raving unless you at least acknowledge and address them, which you have so far failed to do.