Imposition of Christiana Law

Are we really still debating the right to choose in the US? Really?

Does life begin at conception?
Have you heard of weasel words? It's when people use a word or phrase that is slightly different than what they mean in order to assert something that is either not factual or not provable. "Life begins at conception" is a perfect example of weasel words. Here's why:

What the statement "life begins at conception" says is that the embryo is alive. To prove that, you only need to prove things such as metabolism, biological function, etc. Easy. An embryo is most certainly, absolutely, incontrovertibly alive. So were the cells that existed before they fused to form it. So is a house plant.

What the statement "life begins at conception" implies, or is used to assert, is that a human life, humanity, with the right to not be murdered unless the state decides otherwise (lacking, however, the right to choose to end itself) begins at conception. And that's a whole other ball of wax isn't it? The belief that humanity begins at conception is just that, a belief.

So?
So probably more than 99% of the US population is opposed to the imposition of Sharia law within the US. It's one of the few things Americans agree on nearly unanimously. Why? Because Americans recognize that it's wrong to impose laws based on religious beliefs instead of laws based on clearly verifiable facts and logic. It's one of the most basic concepts of the US. Americans may disagree over the right of the US to tell other countries what laws they may or may not have, but advocating for a law limiting directed bequests to one third of the estate and requiring the rest to be distributed according to a state formula with female heirs receiving half as much as male heirs within the US, for example, wouldn't go far. That would be the imposition of a belief with no greater interest of the state involved.

So legislating the belief that humanity begins at conception is no different than the imposition of Sharia law.  It is the imposition of a belief with no greater interest of the state involved.

Every woman has the right to choose not to have an abortion if she believes that the life in her womb, however it was conceived and at whatever risk to her own health, should be viewed as a citizen with rights of its own. She does not, however, have the right to believe that on behalf of the woman next door.

The odd thing is that if I pondered the imposition of Christiana Law, I'd have expected the bits about loving your neighbor to be legislated first, paving the way for the total imposition of Christiana Law. Who knew restrictions would come first? As a Christian, I'm offended. There's nothing Christian about the imposition of Christiana Law. Attempting to found laws on the beliefs of a subset of Christians should be as repulsive to the American spirit as the founding of laws on the beliefs of anyone else.