I think in this sphere an argument can be made for or against anything.

What gives anyone the right to point to a plot of land and say I've bought this with hard money and it's mine?

Everything since cave times has been a slippery slope. I can't argue against that. And I recognize that if I demand freedom in anything, I have no right to deny it to anyone on anything else, either.

So for me this is perhaps like an arbitrary determination of viability in gestation of a child. I assert that before that point, the woman has an absolute right, for any reason or none, to receive an abortion, and that after viability, which can, because of medical advances, only be legislatively determined, the state has the right to assert its interest in the life of the child.

In truth the woman ought to have the absolute right at any point before birth to kill her child. In morality (a sort of natural law, and not in my view attached to any dogma) I'd call that a crime once the child has reached a point of development of independent survival (though it's not really independent survival if extreme medical interventions must be used to save it).

You got a durable answer for any of this stuff? I don't. I'm just as arbitrary as anyone, anywhere, in asserting what I believe to be necessary, or acceptable.