Abortion and Women's Rights

Abortion has nothing to do with women's rights.  Murder is not a right. 

"I fail to see how. " Rather than appreciating the interaction between government, culture and individual you center on the individual in order to create a simple passage of blame and causation. I'm not saying environment can be used to defend deep character flaws or criminal activity, but I am suggesting that the best solutions to a problem lie in anthropology and that dumping a philosophical, virtue-ridden narrative on the issue is a shortcut.
"Those are already factored into her decision she made at the time, and she made it anyway." Well, why make women (and the men, assuming they are part of the equation which they always try to avoid) run through an absurd sieve of problems and factors before and after conception. Having abortions in this day and age is a brave statement, and if it occurs too late, too bad.
"but she can't possibly blame *him* for the fact that *she* is pregnant, when it was *her* decisions that resulted in *her* pregnancy. He can't possibly blame her for the fact that she is pregnant, when it was their decision that resulted in the pregnancy.
"Becoming pregnant is the woman's problem to deal with, and her decisions brought it upon her." Becoming pregnant is their "problem". (In a non-surreal society having kids wouldn't be a burden. How long is the paid-for parental leave period in the US?
"Don't say it is the man's decision, because it isn't, unless we are talking about rape, which we aren't." Well, it is their decision, really.
"This is redundant, the government has a duty to defend the right to life.  This would entail banning late-term abortions with the aforementioned exceptions." Yet, secular, well-off countries with a degree of common sense consider it a non-issue. There is no link between many abortions and society's downfall (my link shows the opposite is true). And before you pipe up, America is currently not a secular country and it is not a secular culture.
"I have no issue with honoring people who create life in a responsible, compassionate manner." How's about creating life despite the twists of fate and making the best out of the genes you've got? That is a human right and you are appearing more and more authorative with each post.
"I fail to see how this would make me or my position authoritarian, or how it would refute my quoted comment you cited." Because it doesn't address the complexity of human culture.
"In case you didn't know it, women have equal protection under the law in the United States.  I don't see what you are saying, or how there is a problem." Once again. The official equal status of women is not reflected in American society. Feminism is thus largely a culturally focusing movement with worrying tendencies to look to government for help. I dislike that politically but understand it pragmatically.
"No, it is an issue.  Senses are a part of what makes a human being a human being.  Here are some of the aspects of life that should be considered in this debate, according to wikipedia" Well, once again, some animals fulfill those criterias to a slight degree. Since the human brain is the most developed on earth, why not ban abortions once the fetus has developed a complexity that outranks that of the runner-up in cerebral complexity?
"But are not human.  It is the proper function of good government to defend human life." Well, you can't dictate when human life starts without a 250-page document argumenting on what makes a human.
"Consciousness and senses would require something akin to a brain." Okay. Then I redefine by stating that said brain must be more complex than the second most cerebrally advanced animal on earth.
"The notion that 'culture' or 'society' needs to bend and conform to your wishes, and act how you please, is very authoritarian." No, the idea that people should behave in a certain dictated manner is authoritarian. The belief that culture can be altered via cumulating movements or arbitrary action is anthropology. The question of how much a culture should be sovereign to government influence is a political one.
"It is not our place to judge our culture, or to use the government to manipulate it, or create a new one." So if an American state decides that non-blacks are to be systematically discriminated in a non-illegal manner, are we to not judge or get some fresh air in there? How's about in the current western world, where women are treated as 85-95 % human in a non-illegal manner?
"The government exists to defend life, liberty, and property, and that's it." As a moderate libertarian, I say that is snafu.