Abortion

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

G-d

Pardon the tangent, but I've seen people do this before - leaving out the 'o' in 'god' - what's the reason?

Imitation of Hebrew Bibles.  The Jews developed a custom of leaving out the vowel points in YHWH or replacing them with the vowel points associated with Adonai (meaning My Lord) which they would say instead when reading the Bible aloud. The substitute vowel points are the origin of Jehovah, tho the evidence indicates the name was most likely originally pronounced Yahweh.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I do not believe that a fetus has absolutely any rights, at all.  Since the concept of rights is based on man's nature, they're only given to fully formed and biologically independent beings.  A fetus is a potential person whose very tangible existence depends on the direct physical nourishment of an individual, so ultimately the woman is left with the moral choice because she retains ownership of her own body.  

The problem with that line of reasoning is that it can lead to atrocities such such as the Nazi Aktion T4.  (Can, not necessarily will.)

And the question to me isn't even about what is or what is not a human, specifically, since many things have human DNA but are not necessarily human.

Conversely for me, the question of abortion to me ultimately comes down to the question of what we mean by "human".  If it is a human life, then the state has every obligation to act in a manner that allows for it achieve its full potential.  If it is not a human life, then the state has no business interjecting itself in the decision.  That is why I have no firm opinion as to when to draw the line between human and non-human, I firmly believe that the occurrence of rape or incest has no bearing on where to draw the line.  Whether or not the biological father deserves to rot in jail has no bearing on whether a life is human or not.

(If pressed, I'd allow abortions before the fetus quickens, disallow them once the fetus is viable, and hope I'm never called on to give an opinion for the period in between.)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I do not believe that a fetus has absolutely any rights, at all.  Since the concept of rights is based on man's nature, they're only given to fully formed and biologically independent beings.  A fetus is a potential person whose very tangible existence depends on the direct physical nourishment of an individual, so ultimately the woman is left with the moral choice because she retains ownership of her own body.  

The problem with that line of reasoning is that it can lead to atrocities such such as the Nazi Aktion T4.  (Can, not necessarily will.)

Not at all.  Hitler murdered fully formed patients because of their physical illnesses, not physical state of being.  In other words, he murdered people who were already born.  Genocide and abortion are two very different things.

So if Hitler had simply left to starve because they were unable to care for themselves, that would have been okay with you?  A large proportion of those killed by T4 were not capable of caring for themselves and thus were not as you put it, "biologically independent".  Also, get your terms right.  T4 was not genocide but eugenics taken to a logical extreme.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Should it be a crime for a pregnant woman to consume alcohol, as this will cause harm to the fetus?

I wouldn't be surprised if this was one of the arguments put forth in favor of prohibition.  Of course, there they decided to ban everyone drinking alcohol, not just pregnant women.  That suggests a simple-minded approach.  Instead of banning pregnant women from getting an abortion, ban everyone from getting them.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Should it be a crime for a pregnant woman to consume alcohol, as this will cause harm to the fetus?

The interesting thing about this question is that it points to the continuity between the fetus and the born child. You might say "It's her body she can do whatever she likes" but then once the child is born and has a damaging condition, has any wrong been done?
The government isn't competent to track the alcohol consumption of every pregnant woman, and I absolutely wouldn't want it to try. But at levels that would damage the child's development, it is an abrogation of that child's rights, and I think the law should have some role here.

We've had pregnant ladies subjected to additional charges beyond basic drug use for using illegal drugs while pregnant.  Wouldn't be much of a stretch to do the same for heavy alcohol use during pregnancy.