the personhood thing isn’t as bad as people think it is.
First, it’ll “out” people as fucking insane. You simply cannot be a functioning member of society and believe that a fetus deserves the right to vote but not, oh, I dunno, Puerto Ricans. (pick some arbitrary thing here) It will draw a wide, stark line between “people who are opposed to abortion for many possibly good reasons” and “fucking lunatics”.
This is why many anti-abortion activists actually oppose personhood laws: it splinters their group. It makes the REAL crazies look JUST like the sorta crazies AND the moderates.
Second, the basis of western common law and stuff is still sorta archaic. I mean I’m not going to go on about the whole white-male privilege thing but much of our law descends from a time when, yeah, women were chattel and stuff. So throwing in something as insane as a blob of cells into this mix, with some magical ability to exert rights independent from the walking, talking, ostensibly-rights-having person (which, incidentally, it requires for its existence) will break the shit outta the law. It just won’t be able to be integrated into the rest of common law unless you break the entire thing. Which I’m sure they’re hoping for but good luck u guise, the world’s getting more tolerant, not less.
I mean it’s awful and fucked up that people genuinely think that a fetus deserves more legal protection than a real human being, but ultimately functioning legal systems are concerned with the rights and privileges of real human beings because free will is sort of essential. Did you chose to break the law did you choose to enter into that contract etc etc. Legal proxies exist for other, well-known reasons; you can’t just start randomly assigning them.