The WaPo discusses it here.

As I have argued in the past, the primary issue is how we can save lives and maximize the probability that we will save the maximum number of lives.

Abortion and the desire for abortion is a symptom, an effect, of a culture that does not support life to the greatest degree it can. Our social structures simply do not reinforce maximal human flourishing which demands a balance between the freedom of conscience and individual liberty and the demand that we all love “the least of these”. We are a culture of abundance that has the luxury of marketing and consuming pleasure while ignoring the demand to love our neighbor. Abortion is one of a myriad of symptoms of that fundamental social problem.

The middle road is to reduce abortion rates by reducing unintended pregnancy first and then to seek stricter legislation that makes a distinction between the non-contingency of human life and ethical medical practice. If the question is how we can save lives and maximize that number over time, this should include all life including the fetus (or zygote, etc.). And further, if the question is that the term “saving life” necessarily implies that the common goal is to create an environment which supports human flourishing, there is no evidence that any movement to overturn Roe v. Wade and/or to prohibit abortion as a medical practice has had any effect at all. Rather, the data suggests that reduction of unintended pregnancy accounts for the greatest variance and thus, the greatest amount of lives saved.

To do this poverty, socio-economic inequalities, and the health of the citizens must be addressed. What must then be addressed is the view from those in more affluent conditions who do not connect pregnancy with life in a palpable enough way that to them abortion is a form of birth control.

It is good to see that people are beginning to approach this situation rationally rather than emotionally. Creating a culture of life and human obligation to ensure that life flourishes must make inroads to our socio-cultural situation before any prohibition of abortion has any success at meeting the goal of saving lives. Counter arguments to this claim require evidence that they are plausible. A deontological argument simply misses this plausibility target I am afraid.