I think this is falsely put forward as a “difficult” problem which is “religious” in nature.
How about biology? How about following the science?
The sperm is alive, but it’s just a cell with mere 23 chromosomes.
The ovum is alive, but it’s just a cell with mere 23 chromosomes.
Put them together, you get a living organism which is demonstrably human, with a full 46 chromosomes. It’s right where it ought to be, and fully viable in that location. Human Life. Right there. At fertilization. This isn’t hard.
Would Sotomayer be insulted if someone said to her that one wished the justice’s mother aborted her as early as the moment of conception instead of having her sit on the Supreme Court? If she is intellectually honest, she would be insulted because it compels her to acknowledge when life begins. For without conception, she would never have been born.
Since the Constitution protects life, liberty and pursuit of happiness without due process, that conceived life is entitled to federal constitutional due process protection - even the states cannot deny due process for the unborn under the 10th Amendment.
If the argument is about self-awareness or viability, is a newborn self-aware or viable?
Can a newborn understand the world around it? Can it survive on it’s own?
If not, why the shock and outrage when a newborn is found in a dumpster abandoned like yesterday’s trash?