Abortion and human rights

You misunderstand "conservatism". In China, communists are the conservatives. If you think of "conservatism" as the current day American conservatism - YES it helped a lot.

You clearly misunderstand human rights. The important thing is not exactly how people are treated, but that they are treated FAIRLY, aka as equal beings. Yes, the government can't afford good healthcare to people (unlike in Norway), but they are not paying healthcare ONLY for a particular group like jews, women, or layers. Poor people have a higher priority for healthcare not because their human value is greater, but because their ability to fend for themselves is weaker than other groups.

Except for people that don’t have money for their medical bills, people in comas, prisoners, fetuses, etc, etc, etc.

Overall this is amoral in terms of it doesn’t solely lean one way or the other.

The question: "What is an ethical system that supports human rights and abortion at the same time?"

You cannot refer to law. Killing Jews is not moral just because in a particular society they did not consider Jews to be humans. Come with a moral theory, like Theweakeredge.

When there is a danger to both humans, the mother and the "fetus baby".

You have not added any moral system - just a lot of moral claims.

So what. If you sit in a train that is fully packed - you might end up severely uncomfortable. You cannot just kill the other humans and throw them out to feel comfortable.

"Bodily autonomy" does not triumph over human rights. 

You agreed that all with human DNA are humans - that includes a fetus. So if human rights exist it is immoral to legally gass a jew, and immoral to legally kill a fetus. 

I’m defending our current moral system. 

Morality isn’t objective. It’s intersubjective.

Also a fetus/embryo isn’t as developed (nervous system) as a child that is born or a fully grown person. 

Why do you keep on bringing up Jews?

We have no moral system. You are defending current liberal beliefs

This statement undermines universal human rights. If Germany wanted to murder the jews, they are morally justified, they could just create a new moral system.

It is clear that you want to value different people differently. I could use the same argument: "a child is not as developed as an adult - therefore they are less valuable"

This statement undermines universal human rights

Holocaust is the single biggest symbol of what happens when you disregard universal human rights.

Hitler called the jews "less human" than other people, and thus justified the murder of 6 million jews.

What would the morality be based on? I say catastrophic ignorance.

Yet the child has a developed nervous system and is conscious. 

People do bad shit regardless

People that disagree with your view could say the same about the current moral system which justifies abortion.

You yet again admit that you value people differently based on their physical traits.

You cannot call an action "bad shit" without a sense of universal human rights. But your view undermines human rights.

Minds greater than you or I have learnt from history and sided against your moral views on abortion.

Because the world is more complicated than you would like it to be. 

Is gravity universal? Yes. Does gravity vary depending on what objects are present? Yes.

Do planets orbit stars? Yes.

Do you understand the analogy I’m getting at?

Give me a source or moral philosophy. As far as society is concerned - those people just have strong opinions and a demanding voice.

Do you think that I could kill you and still be justified? After all the world is complicated. No, you would not - neither would the fetus when it magically becomes a baby at birth.

You say that murdering people is morally wrong in your country, but in my country murdering people is morally good - because morality is based on personal opinions, not universal principles.

This is why reason and empathy are good. Most of morality is intersubjective because we’re a social species.  

By the way murder is a legal term for the most part.

I give up. You mean that morality does not exist - society just has laws. "Hitler was not evil he just had another intersubjective morality than you and me."

I believe morality is objective (but not necessarily our understanding of it) - therefore my ethics are incompatible with yours

You believe morality is preordained? 

Humans have a right to die a natural death - therefore humans have no right to kill each other, including through abortion

which infringes on bodily autonomy of the mother,

yet going by a human DNA standard,

I will further add that even the pro-choice argument of viability [able to function post-womb] is being accomplished at earlier and earlier points in gestation, completely obliterating the idea of not just late, but mid-term abortion. The record is a successful premature birth at nineteen weeks.

Do you really believe all humans have a right to die a natural death?

I believe murder is immoral. 

Is killing a human always murder?

Is killing a human always murder?

By definition, murder is only the intentional killing of another human being outside of the law.

I think that all humans are equally valuable

if you're defining your morality ("murder") by legal standards, doesn't that mean it is impossible for a law to be immoral?

Ok, does this mean that you split your time and resources equally among all humans?

I do not define my morality on the law.

The time and resources I have are not controlled by morality but rather by my interests.

I talk about killing a human as opposed to other animals.

Isn't it immoral to spend time and resources and focus that could be used to save lives on activities that do not save lives?

Do you think it's immoral to kill animals?

Find me a philosophy that prohibits the killing of animals.

morality tells us what we cannot do - not what we must do.

I challenge anyone to give me a moral system capable of support the abortion industry and human rights at the same time.

Moral system: A moral standard, a moral authority and a way to measure moral value (who is valuable means who should be treated morally good)

Human rights: The idea that all humans are equally valuable regardless of their position, traits and views.

Human: A being with its own distinct DNA which is a part of the species homo sapiens