Can a feminist be pro-life?

[Silent3]

26. Of course, and not just in the DU-safe formulation...

...of being personally against abortion, but not wanting to interfere with other women's choices.

While I certainly don't hold this opinion myself, if, for whatever reason, a person decides to value human life in every form starting from a fertilized egg up until the moment of birth as fully equal in value to a person who has been born, I can see where a pro-life/anti-choice position would follow. No matter how much, as a feminist, a pro-life feminist valued equal treatment of women and women's control over their own bodies, the value of an unborn human life would have to exceed those concerns if that life is considered to be as worthy of protection as post-birth human life.

It would not even be impossible to be a feminist who is against abortion even when the life of the mother is at risk. It's not uncommon in many moral dilemmas for people to be much more comfortable with accepting harm caused by inaction over harm caused by deliberate action (as in some variants of the trolley problem). The moral choice here is between the mother's loss of life caused by not doing anything to interfere with a pregancy and loss of the unborn child's life by actively killing the unborn child. There is also the fact that moral choice is often one between possible loss of the mother's life and definite loss of the unborn child's life.

If you move the point at which you start to value an unborn human life as equal (or nearly so) to born human life past conception, but still during the time of pregnancy, you arrive at a range of positions on the issue of abortion which a fair number of feminists and liberal are comfortable with, accepting or actively supporting restrictions on late-term abortions, such as requiring them to be medically necessary.