I appreciate the way you lay out your argument but I refuse to agree because if you're right the consequences would be too much to grapple with.
Some abortions are justified, others aren't. A compromise was done that lets unjustified abortions take place, enabling a loophole for eugenics.
If we embark in this eugenics journey, where does it stop? Should everyone with a GPA of less than 4.0 be killed? Should everyone not capable of running a marathon be killed? Should everyone with less than 1000 followers on TikTok be killed? Should everyone not able to name at least 100 Pokemons be killed?
Eugenics is wrong and we should be able to say it.
For anyone who is not religious, the entire process of procreation through to birth is life. There is no point at which life begins because every part of the process is life. If any part of the process wasn't life, it wouldn't work. Everything the parent said is correct.
1) intervention + loss of life = killing
2) killing + of a human + by a human = homicide
3) homicide + premeditation + malice = murder
In the abortion case:
- an intervention takes place resulting in loss of life = an organism is killed (1)
- the organism being killed is human. the intervention is done by a human = a homicide (2)
Now, is it murder (i.e.: is it "wrong")? it's as homicide (human killed by human) and it's premeditated. But is there malice?
There are situations where loss of life is inevitable unless an intervention takes place, and there are other scenarios. This can be used to establish whether the abortion (i.e.: homicide with premeditation) is justified or not. But it's still technically a homicide with premeditation, regardless of whether it is justified or rightful.