A blastocyst that is intentionally prevented from developing further by making the uterine environment inhospitable is precisely the same thing both in intent and outcome as what happens with a medication abortion (RU-486):
The pill works at times by thinning the uterine lining, which is needed to support the development of a fertilized egg.
You can talk about what changes have or haven’t taken place in the body of the mother, but these are the same thing, just accomplished by two different means. We have other means as well.
You're focusing too hard on conflating the actions with the outcomes. A woman using preventative medicine to decrease the chance of a pregnancy is by definition not an abortion.
You're argumentation would also imply that if a man has a nightly emission he is performing abortion because a child could have been created, then listing the biological comparisons between a nightly emission and abortion claiming similarities make them the identical.
“RU-486 works by blocking the action of the hormone progesterone, which is needed to support the development of a fertilized egg.” (From https://www.britannica.com/science/abortion-pregnancy )
The pill works at times by thinning the uterine lining, which is needed to support the development of a fertilized egg.
You can talk about what changes have or haven’t taken place in the body of the mother, but these are the same thing, just accomplished by two different means. We have other means as well.