Cheers for tackling such a difficult topic. I'd never heard of the unconscious violinist, but it tracks: a mother can't be forced to donate bone marrow, or organs, or even blood to save a child's life. So why do we think we can force birth?

Gut flora may have something in common with a blastocyst, save for the fact that gut flora won't develop into an embryo, or baby, in most cases. It won't do that in any case.

So if we accept that from conception forward, the organization of cells and tissues has the same potential to be a cooing baby as a toddler has to become an adult, and so on, then the abortion conundrum is obvious; two humans sharing a body. Who has the prevailing rights?

If it's the developing homo sapien in utero, then the sociocultural emphasis would seem to be on procreation and fertility (not to mention climate denial and patriarchal values). "Keep 'em coming!" If it's the older, developing homo sapien mother, then the emphasis would seem to be on age, experience, egalitarian values, even anti-capitalism.