The new abortion law is an abomination and if it weren't for some of the ridiculous SCOTUS rulings lately I would assume it would get struck down. Their failure to block its implementation is hopefully the worst thing that will happen. No doubt many people will have undue hardship/heartache in the meantime.
I like to talk about abortion in general, because I hate that we are held hostage to the issue, when neither side is actually serious about resolving it.
So I'm going to go down a few of the talking points from both sides:
------------------
Guitarstv insists, virtually every time the topic comes up on these forums, that a fetus is not a baby. And the thing about that argument, is that G presents it as a "you are trying to elicit an emotional response by calling abortion babymurder" (point ceded) and the thing is, there is no point you could make in the discussion more certain to accomplish nothing and elicit an emotional response as trying to make that distinction that a fetus is not a baby. I strongly recommend, if the intent is to have a conversation, that you ignore the murderbaby characterization of abortion, because what that person is really doing is advertising the specific brand of belief they have, and allowing you to engage them along effective vectors. You will never, ever, talk them out of the idea that abortion does not result in no child where otherwise it would have been child.
The point at which we're talking about a human life is indeterminate, and there is no there, there. Every avenue of discussion along these lines will not be constructive, because there is simply no way to resolve this point. Whatever arbitrary point you decide to say "that's a life" can be successfully used via reductio ad absurdum to argue in favor of either 216 month abortions (if you think abortion is OK) or mandatory sexual intercourse with any fertile person (if you think abortion is wrong). Clearly there IS a middle ground, but no: religion, science, etc, can offer what is at best a very well considered opinion and at worst: wrong. We simply do not know, and we cannot know. Some of us have managed to make a kind of peace with the likelihood that it's probably OK to roto-rooter that thing before it can feel pain, but that doesn't mean we are right, it means we are willing to accept that as likely true and there's just alot goin on in the world, at a certain point make a decision and move on. It has not always been illegal to murder you own baby. Civilization doesn't even need a general prohibition on murder to get along just fine. Where we draw the line about what is, and what is not, OK, is arbitrary and always has been. Your foundation is, and always has been, built on convention. Any attempt to establish some sort of authority for where you draw the line is doomed.
-----------------
Sanctity of life vs. sanctity of each person's self
This is the "it's to protect the rights of the child" vs "the person's right to make choices about their own body."
Were you to evaluate this along the standard moral guide of "the decision that results in the most people alive at the end of the day is probably the right answer" then the conflict between the woman's right to make decisions about her body and the fetusbaby's need for that body in order to not die, then the choice is clear. And if that's not the standard we're using, then please stop taxing me to stop things like starvation and violent crime. If it's OK for you to take from me without my consent for the benefit of some hypothetical other, then why is it wrong for me to insist that you make a similar sacrifice for the very real fetusbaby? Insisting that a woman should just be free to make that decision is attractive to me, because the same logic that supports that supports me likewise shedding responsibilities that I too find inconvenient.
I will believe the "personal freedom/choice" argument when you fully surrender any right to paternal support. Likewise, if a woman can choose to have an abortion, the father of the child should get to make the same choice. You should require the consent of the father to bring the child to term. The pro-choice argument is immediately destroyed, to my mind, by the reality of the inconsistency of the stances on this issue. Pro-child once the thing is society's problem, pro-individual rights until then, except only the mother's right, everyone else get fucked. If we have an obligation to each other, AND EVERY OTHER PART OF THE LIBERAL PLATFORM INSISTS THIS IS TRUE, then pregnant women have an obligation to the fetusbaby. It is hypocrisy to imply otherwise.
For the Pro-life people, if you haven't personally gone out of your way to provide housing, education, employment, community, acceptance, actualization, to mothers and expectant mothers, regardless of the circumstances of the birth, go fuck yourself. You don't care about abortion and are doing NOTHING, practically, to prevent the practice. There would be WAY fewer abortions if religion wasn't there to call the mom a whore and the kid a bastard. You are the cause of the issue, go away and it will go away. Even better, live the word of the BIG JAY EZUS and create a world where a woman would choose to bring the baby into it because that's seen as the blessed miracle it is and not the COMPLETE CATASTROPHE you've turned it into. Go read the book, there's nothing in the new testament about treating people like shit until they do what you want them to and Levitical law was vetoed by THE KING. Going all old testament on borties is rejecting the savior. It is hypocrisy to imply otherwise.
There is simply no excuse, no reason, no appropriate time, to be disrespectful to others. And committing the various violations required to enforce an abortion ban requires numerous, egregious, unacceptable invasions of privacy.
--------------------
"My body my choice when it comes to vaccines but not when it comes to fetus- what morons"
Uh yea, absolutely, both of you. People should be free to refuse a vaccine, you are arguing that it is OK to mandate them. If it's OK to mandate a vaccine then it's OK to mandate pregnancy, forget banning abortion, you can straight up haul women off to be impregnated. I'm vaccinated, that was a personal choice, everyone should make that choice, get vaccinated against all the things! But the line you cross to make it mandatory is....not to be crossed without grace and compassion, certainly not with the...grotesquery, of the current national discourse. Engaging with folks with mockery and contempt has completely failed. Next time lets try something else. Acknowledge the reality of the tribal/partisan separation and do NOT make critical, life-or-death things partisan issues. "It's OK for me to be an ass because they're dumb!" Michelle Obama told you to go high. You believe yourself to be better, act like it. Rise above.
But what about all the dead people?!!! Uh yea, what about all the aborted people? It is so strange to me to see the autistic shrieking at each other. That said, I'm going to make a ruling here, the anti-vax people are definitely wrong. We can totes make an exception to the personhood-choice for this one thing and not slippery-slope our way into mandatory pregnancy/abortion bans. That doesn't take a whole lot of cognitive dissonance tolerance. This here is a "this solution is just too easy to not do" territory.
--------------------
What would be great:
The imminently practical solution of: acknowledge as a society that alot of abortions are undesirable and we we should really work towards creating a world where fewer women choose to get them, not through fear, intimidation, or lack of access (all of which does not save the soul of the one who desires the abortion, intent is equally damning), but through compassion and love and awesome communities (which would save the soul by removing most of the temptations).
And then for those like myself who can't be bothered to personally engage with creating the above (beyond, you know, not being an ass to pregnant women and smiling at babies), don't create any babies you know for sure won't be brought to term (wrap it up or keep it tucked, absolutely no rape, not even a lil bit), and otherwise stay out of it.
As for women that straight up just do it for the convenience, well, I too have sinned, and if we stop all sins, then Jesus died for nothing...
As far as the "society has an obligation to prevent, through punishment of offenders, murder..."
I'm not so sure it does. I sort of feel like the REAL way we prevent murder is by not being horrible to people. Think about it, for real, deep down, do you not kill people because it's against the rules? Naw, it's cause it's a chore like everything else and nobody is REALLY up in your face asking for it. I'd straight up murder anyone that crossed certain lines, no questions asked, and chief among offenses that'd get you insta-murdered by TOYM is crawling up into my uterus uninvited and hanging out for nine months.
But anyway, it's a complicated topic and as a country the U.S. has not discussed it responsibly in my lifetime. The autistic screeching of both sides has made zero progress and created a situation where fringe belief structures yield outsized influence on both parties, endangering personal freedoms to maintain faction alliances. "Woman's right to choose" and "Abortion is murder" are bullshit overly simplistic non-constructive unnuanced extremist positions, and so many people are going to be hurt, all over the country, if SCOTUS doesn't grow a pair and end the fight. That it is still on the table is a systemic failure of the Democratic party. Leaving it there as a threat, "vote for us or they'll take it away," should make every pro-choice person join the republican party and vote for pro-choice republicans. That republicans have finally started acting on the religious fringe demands should make every rational person join the democrats and vote for fiscally conservative democrats.
My hope is that SCOTUS strikes it down hard, in a censorious way. Excoriate the people who passed it as incompetent, weak, tiny-dicked fascists. That's probably not going to happen, but what a shitshow. I think it's going to get struck down just from the enforcement mechanism, because that's a monstrous enforcement protocol that deserves to be ruled unconstitutional. Would be great if they went a step further and ordered the drafters be shot. Garbage humans, absolutely garbage. Imagine looking at how awful the litigiousness of our society is, and all the problems it causes, and deciding, "yea, more of that please."
And yea, anybody that thinks "going to another state" is in any way viable, most of Texas is 8+hour drive from a border, so it's a huge fucking problem. This will stop abortion in Texas, completely. OR it will result in the end of accurate maternal medical records, depending on the evidentiary requirements the courts use when the first lawsuits come through. "I see you have form 6996-AB, certifying the pregnancy was 3 weeks old at the time of the termination, signed by the uterus owner and witnessed by a notary public, case dismissed." Make abortion court like eviction court, "can the fetus provide evidence it was older than 6 weeks? What do you mean it isn't here? Well you have to BE here to be represented, case dismissed on 6th amendment grounds."
From a long term perspective though, abortion bans always result in the complete destruction of the group that passed them. Takes 20-25 years, but it always happens.