>

No one has the right to use someone else's body without their consent. Ever.
It’s completely insane that medical procedures can be legislated by politicians in the first place. They are literally not qualified. 
If a person wants to treat patients they have to spend 10 years getting a degree from an accredited medical school and complete residency along with a multitude of additional rigorous tests, yet someone writing and passing laws about how and when medical procedures can be performed requires zero qualifications. 
How does that make any sense? In any other context individuals without a medical degree can be sued or even imprisoned if they treat patients without proper qualifications. 
Companies cannot make medical claims regarding their products without rigorous testing and certification from federal agencies. 
But some yahoo with a high school degree can legislate patient care with zero medical knowledge? Do we need permission from our Senators to qualify for a heart transplant? To get chemo? To donate organs? To accept organs donated from someone else? To initiate cardiac bypass procedures? Receive kidney dialysis? 
It’s complete madness. >

I mean it’s pretty simple. Republicans believe that fetuses are people, and the question is not whether a woman can have a medical procedure on herself but on herself and another person. I’m pretty sure most people would agree that you couldn’t decide to kill a 2 year old even if the child hypothetically posed a health risk to you, let alone in any instance. So really pro life republicans and democrats disagree about age when the baby has rights.
Disclaimer for those who care - I’m very pro choice, but that doesn’t mean I can’t see another persons POV.