Batman Slapping Robin

Yes, that's what everyone's been saying to you. Everyone's had a long and hard think and they have by a significant majority decided that they are ok with personhood starting at birth.

There is nothing even close to a "consensus" on when person-hood begins, but he law needs easily drawn lines, whether those lines are meaningful or not. The two easy to see lines are conception and birth. Nothing transformational happens at birth, but as a line is convenient.
If you go with science, conception when the individuals unique genome is created and growth begins is when it's a human life. I don't subscribe to that, as i feel our "humanity" is a philosophical issue having to do with our consciousness.
I don't claim to have "the" answer. No one does. Which is why there will never be a consensus.

"Nothing transformational happens at birth, but as a line is convenient."

NOTHING TRANSFORMATIONAL?

Seriously?

How about, the fetus stops being inside a person.

Did you study biology at school?

Location is not transformational.

Do you genuinely think that's the only change? Location?

The law HAS an easily drawn line. It's birth. It makes no medical sense for the line to be conception. There are too many reasons why a pregnancy might not even come to term that have nothing to do with elective termination at all.

Even after birth, there can be many reasons a child might not survive. Psychologically for a mother, it's better to tell themselves it wasn't a human life yet. It's a comforting lie if the child is wanted.
People argue mother might be prosecuted for having natural miscarriages. It would still be on the prosecution to prove that the mother caused it and that it was not natural. Given that prosecutors often choose not to prosecute cases with far more evidence, I find it unlikely that would actually happen.

You've pretty much just admitted that prosecutors would have to spend a non zero amount of time just to look at this, even it's to choose not to prosecute. Doctors would have to spend their time writing notes and turning over documentation that will have the words "this is a routine, regular, all-too-often thing that should not be prosecuted" written over and over.

And for what?

So that you get the ego boost to pretending that you're protecting something that you'll never have to actually see, hear, educate, feed, and keep safe, and wouldn't and don't do any of those things to children that ARE already born.

Yeah, no, majority says anything after 24 months, is not right, and you should probably look into adoption. If only adoption was cheaper and easier,...nope let's just kill the little f**keR, he/she is just going to make more...

Which makes it REALLY weird that the same party that goes out of its way to restrict access to abortion ALSO slashes budgets to adoption services left right and center.

So, we agree BIGGER GOVERNMENT is not the way?

Does the word "agree" just mean something completely different in the dictionary you're using?

That was sarcasm, because I knew what you blah blah blah..

Then I don't think you know what sarcasm means either

So you don't mind innocent children dying, because an adult could buy birth control?

You're trying to say that I don't mind electively terminating a pregnancy. Which I don't.

According to the bible, a fetus is not a living person with a soul until after drawing its first breath.

After God formed man in Genesis 2:7, He “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and it was then that the man became a living being”. Although the man was fully formed by God in all respects, he was not a living being until after taking his first breath.

In Job 33:4, it states: “The spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.”

Again, to quote Ezekiel 37:5&6, “Thus says the Lord God to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live. And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live; and you shall know that I am the Lord.”

Jeremiah 1:5 God says, “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you; before you were born, I sanctified you; and I ordained you a prophet to the nations.” This is one of those verses that a lot of people hate because it clearly brings to our attention the sovereignty and control of God.

According to the Bible? In Genesis 2 and Ezekiel 37, it's rather obvious that those are not ordinary cases. We shouldn't appeal to extraordinary cases to justify murder in ordinary cases. In Job 33, the Hebrew word for "breath" is "neshamah" (נְשָׁמָה) which is the same word for "spirit", and in this case, a more proper translation would render it as such. However, even if "breath" is the proper translation, that wouldn't prove that a fetus is not a living person with a soul until after drawing its first breath, as you say, because the breath/spirit belongs to God, not to Job.

Since you mentioned Job, it seems appropriate to mention when he really thought life began.

Job 10:18 "Why did you bring me out from the womb? Would that I had died before any eye had seen me"
How could Job have died before he was alive? This is an exceedingly stupid proposition. It's evident that Job was indeed alive in his mother's womb.

I'll share a few more texts here:
Jeremiah 20:15-17 "Cursed be the man who brought the news to my father, 'A son is born to you,' making him very glad. Let that man be like the cities that the Lord overthrew without pity; let him hear a cry in the morning and an alarm at noon, because he did not kill me in the womb; so my mother would have been my grave, and her womb forever great."

Luke 1:15 "and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother's womb."

Remember Schoolhouse Rock? Three is a magic number-
https://youtu.be/J8lRKCw2_Pk?t=178

https://youtu.be/OmsXsIv2Ppw