It's very clear that the Republican Party is not supportive of funding a sexual healthcare provider unless it only teaches abstinence.
I'm glad you're in favor of artifical wombs, but until that happens, please note that the live ones are attached to people who deserve the same degree of bodily autonomy you have.
Simplest possible case: there is no situation in which the current law will force you to donate your organs in order to save someone else's life. Even if you're already dead, you get to control your body through a pre-registration, an affirmative choice. The anti-abortion laws require women to potentially sacrifice their lives to save others.
In response to your original comment, I believe there's also a desire to punish people for having premarital sex, as evidenced by right-wingers' strong opposition to emergency contraceptives.
I've never had a conversation with a person who was broadly anti-abortion and anti-subsidized-birth-control that didn't end with the explicit impression that they feel disgust for people who have sex before marriage or for reasons other than reproduction, and that the primary notion upsetting them is the idea of their taxes going toward those people in any form. It's clearly a notion born out of the popular and too-eagerly-applied idea of "bad" people who "deserve" consequences.
I'm glad you're in favor of artifical wombs, but until that happens, please note that the live ones are attached to people who deserve the same degree of bodily autonomy you have.
Simplest possible case: there is no situation in which the current law will force you to donate your organs in order to save someone else's life. Even if you're already dead, you get to control your body through a pre-registration, an affirmative choice. The anti-abortion laws require women to potentially sacrifice their lives to save others.