There are a very limited number of issues that people are more passionate about than abortion. At the core of this debate are the principles of personal autonomy and individual freedoms. These are foundational principles of conservative political philosophy. A true conservative applies this ideological standpoint universally and consistently regardless of circumstance. The creator bestows us with certain undeniable rights including the ability to govern yourself. Staunch individualism with limited government intervention are where the discussion of abortion should start and end from a Republican candidate.
As a moderate conservative I can understand the need for some regulation. There should be some limits on the use of this procedure and those mechanism already exist. The medical procedure is performed by a licensed provider at a licensed location. The provider can apply their own limitations on when they are willing or unwilling to perform the procedure. The state board that issues and regulates the provider can also establish their regulation for when the procedure is reasonable and when it is not and finally the states themselves can regulates businesses that operate in their state. We already have multiple layers of regulation and oversight ensuring that nothing negligent, abusive or below any moral or ethical standard is violated. There is no need for the federal government to regulate what women do with their medical provider or their uteruses.
The same goes for everyone all of the time and not some people some of the time. If a person does not want to take a vaccine, that is their right. The same right that allows a woman to get an abortion from a licensed provider. Any need to regulate healthcare beyond that is essentially distrust of the medical provider and/or the medical industrial complex. If you trust medical providers there is no need for any further regulation because the provider will not violate their state's or their own standard of care or do anything that is beyond reasonable out of fear of prosecution.
State's do have rights and states do have a rich history of being closely related to the religion and spiritual beliefs of the people living there. The great American experiment is a government of, by and for the people. If enough people in the community are motivated to elect leaders that draft laws the people are motived to support and enforce, that is the will of the people. I would argue that any law in any state that limits a woman's access to healthcare violates their protected rights. There is no need for new laws, only for the laws of the land to be interrupted and enforced correctly.
