Anti Abortion argument

I saw this posted so what do you guys think?

Here's counter arguments I've come up to counter some pro-choice arguments that dehumanize the unborn. I've rarely (if ever) seen some of these used by any other pro-lifers. Let me know what you think of them, and if you like them, you're free to use them.

"A fetus isn't human."

From the moment of conception, an unborn person has human DNA unique from that of its parents, and its gender, hair color, physical appearance, and to an extent its personality is already determined. It then begins to grow/age under the instructions of its DNA, which it continues to do for the rest of its life.

"A fetus isn't alive"

If a fetus wasn't alive, it would never even begin to grow/reproduce cells. It wouldn't have a beating heart by 21 days after conception (a bodily function considered to be a vital sign in "born" people) or any other functioning organs, and it wouldn't require nourishment through the umbilical cord. It'd essentially be an egg with a sperm cell stuck in it forever.

"A fetus is only *potential life."

This is defining "life" beginning when someone is born, which is nothing but a made up philosophy that serves the sole purpose of justifying abortion. It completely ignores the science of human development.

"It's just a fetus."

"Fetus", which is Latin for "offspring", is just another name for a stage of life, just like the terms "infant", "toddler", "adolescent", etc. Justifying abortion because a "fetus" is just a "fetus" is just a "because I say so" philosophy with no logical or scientific backing.

Speaking of the term fetus, ever notice how the only time it's used outside of formal medical language is justifying abortion? Outside of the abortion debate, everyone refers to an unborn baby as a "baby." No one says "fetus bump", no one has a "fetus shower", no mother tells her kids "mommy has a fetus in her tummy", etc. They always call it a "baby."

"It's just a blob of tissue."

If a fetus was just a formless blob of cells/tissue, no one would ever bother looking at an ultrasound unless it was to justify abortion, as pro-choicers would be using it as "proof" a "fetus" isn't a "baby", as all you'd see on the ultrasound is a formless blob. But of course this isn't the case, as an ultrasound will show a fetus looks like a baby, which pro-choicers try to make laws banning women from seeing before an abortion.

"A fetus lacks sentience and personhood."

These are philosophical terms made up for the sole purpose of justifying abortion, and aren't based on science at all. They're more examples of "because I say so" arguments.

"Being against abortion is nothing but a religious belief, so you can't force it on people."

All the counterarguments I've presented here are not based on religion it all. They're based on either science or logic. In fact, this is very ironic, as pro-choicers often claim to be all about "science", yet when it comes to abortion, they ignore science and resort to made-up philosophy, which they ironically view religion as. So they break their own rules.
Also, the religious case for abortion comes from "Thou shalt not kill." If abortion should be legal because of separation of church and state, then it should be fully legal to kill "born" people for any reason.