Let me be the first to cheer those good people for defending the ones who cannot defend themselves. I love their commitment to life. They're the good guys.
Unfortunately, sometimes the path good people take is not at all the right path. To strictly define life as starting at conception, and granting full protection of the law to those unborn sounds really noble and righteous, and I sincerely want to agree with every last letter of this law, but I fear this law may well have a little trouble keeping up with technology -- among other concerns.
After all, under this definition, there is no mention of a differentiation between natural and in vitro fertilization. Does the laboratory-mated batch of embryos genuinely equal those in utero? When a couple has a hundred embryos created in the hopes of having a single child, does this law protect the doctor and the parents, if they decide to freeze for storage or simply dispose of those not needed after a successful pregnancy? How are biological progenitors protected, when the match is made in a test tube? Does this law allow for protection, when science develops even more complex situations (and it most assuredly will)?
Further, how does this proposed law deal with severe hardship pregnancies which are not immediately life-threatening? Suppose a loving, married woman has done all she can to prevent pregnancy, because she has been told she is not strong enough to support a pregnancy, and yet her preventive measures fail. Suppose the mother is told that, in order to secure this new life, she will be required to remain bed-ridden for a year. It won't kill her, but she will be unable to care for herself, let alone her child in its initial growth. Will the law require her to be a fragile, unwilling vessel, simply because she's not actually dying?
Will every medically-required termination require a court hearing to decide whether or not it was justifiable homicide? What will this do to the courts? How will this affect liability laws? How will this affect medical insurance availablity and costs for patients, and malpractice insurance for the medical industry?
And, how does this all measure up to the notion that each American adult is a free and sovereign person? Sure, lady, you're sovereign until the second you bump uglies with sonny-boy over there, and after that, you're property of the little thing growing inside you. Don't mess with it, or there'll be hell to pay. How far will that go? Do we punish a woman for crimes against the fetus even if she endangers the child before she is aware she is pregnant?
I'm all for protecting life, but I'm not at all sure this law is the answer the proponents think it is.