I also don't see any contradiction with being on one side for abortion rights and an opposite one with the death penalty. It's not just about life vs. death you know, there are many more issues involved.
Abortion is the death penalty for a fetus, but now you're trying to argue a right to life before being born. My whole personal opinion is that until you exit the womb, there is a chance something can go wrong and that includes an abortion. No, I don't think 3rd trimester abortions are ok unless there is a serious late-discovered problem for the child. The death penalty is a punishment for a crime against safety and welfare of the public. The only flaw is that sometimes an innocent person can be convicted. But let's not convert this thread into the death penalty debate....
The whole viability of a fetus is recognized in many court opinions. Yes a fetus has a heartbeat, fingers, eyes, brain, toes, etc. before it is born. However, my argument is not whether or not the fetus has the characteristics of life, but can it sustain itself yet. You can stretch the argument that at conception it has developed the genetic characteristics of life, but you don't see fertilized eggs hopping around and eventually turning into kids.
As for legislating based on religious morality, I think that is incorrect. Just because religions follow the same belief that something is wrong doesn't mean the law is based in religion. Thou shalt not steal and robbery are the same, but you won't see any court opinion's quoting Moses as the definitive source. Kepping people from harming other people is why we have laws. They do have their roots connected to relgious beliefs, but I couldn't find the first amendment anywhere in religious scriptures.
I think the modern approach is to say there are 3 positions for abortion:
Pro-life=life is sacred
Pro-choice=if you want one, you should have a choice
Pro-abortion=complete control over a woman's body
Just pick a side and move on I guess
RUgreek