The woman in fact pattern one
The store owner in fact pattern two
They both have the right to kill
Neither has the right to kill
I'd like to compare the body to a boat. I'm on a 9 month sailing trip on a small vessle to another continent. I find a 1-year old who's been left there without my permission. The infant is going to inconvenience me greatly (crying, hassle, food, fellow shipmates making fun of me for having to care for it). And, while the chance is very slim, the child could put my life at risk at some time if I want to keep it safe (not yet, but it could happen on a long trip). I think everyone would agree that I'm completely in the right to throw the 1 year old to the sharks, correct? I mean, what kind of fool would suggest that I have an obligation to try to get the kid to safety?
I don't say any of this to try to prove that a mom shouldn't have a choice (not the appropriate poll). But, the idea that the rights and discussion considered with abortion revolve around property rights doesn't hold up under meager scrutiny - it's only supported by the most militant pro-choice supporter (oh, yes, including the Supreme Court).
If you want to say it's not life - that makes sense. If you want to say life itself isn't particularly important, that could make sense, too. But to say that abortion is the same as an eviction is ridiculous (my humble opinion).
The US is an odd ship. The captain yells out when he sees obtacles , but 535 individual propellers do the steering.