I do not have a problem with protecting other species that live on this planet. And, except for some very extreme cases under the auspices of the Environmental Protection Act, most of this oversight is a good thing because it keeps the planet a viable place for all life since every living thing is so intricately connected by that thread of life. Which begs the question. If killing the unborn, or yet to be born, offspring of non-human species is a federal crime what kind of society are we that allows the wanton destruction of the unborn, or soon to be born, human life residing within the womb of a human female?
Sure it's easy to hide behind the old cliche that a woman has the right to choose what she does with her own body, but does she have that same right over the life of an unborn human body that for the short span of none months is living in and off of her body? Does that unborn human life have any rights or do those rights only belong to the woman housing the unborn life? It is these questions that have plagued Americans well before the Supreme Court first held up the legality of Roe vs Wade.
Without sounding like I want to force everyone to live by my standard on this particular issue I will state that I do have an opinion to share about it and while I agree it is a woman's right to do with her body as she chooses (just as it is a man's right to do what he chooses with his), it is also a society's right to mandate that a person's individual right need not be the societal norm.
In a democratic republic the rights of the individual are upheld and even put on a pedestal as the highest form of expression for liberty, but, all organized societies also recognize the need for some kind of order, thus the need for limited government and laws. If a society mandates by majority decision that abortion is legal, as it has done in the United States, then it is legal and vice versa.
However, we all know that what's legal isn't always what is just and right. Is it right and just for a society to be so misguided as to go out of its way to protect a tree frog, or yes, even eagle's eggs, making it a federal offense to destroy these living creatures (some before birth such as the eagle eggs) yet make it legal for a woman to destory the life she has been entrusted to carry within her. Perhaps she should just destroy her eggs in the ova that way there would never be any need to destroy an actual forming life in her womb. Or, perhaps she could harvest those eggs for later implantation through in-vitro fertilization for future use in case she should ever decide to allow the unborn life to reach full term.
I wonder what rights an unborn forming and living human life has in America? Obviously not as much as forming living eagles still nestled in their eggs.