I had not seen this

 "A monk who has been accepted should not deprive a living being of life, even if it is only a black or white ant. Any monk who purposely deprives a human being of life, even to the extent of causing an abortion, is not a contemplative, not a son of the Sakyan.

"Just as a solid block of stone broken in two cannot be joined together again, in the same way a monk who has purposely deprived a human being of life is not a contemplative, not a son of the Sakyan. You are not to do this for the rest of your life."

— Mv I.78.2

Some of the practices of endangering the life of the mother because we’re swinging too far towards pro-birthers of low chances in highly compromised and deformed fetuses. And the dangers of botched illegal abortions, plus the rise in crime as abortion becomes illegal doesn’t make it so clean. It’s a religious stance that doesn’t necessarily mean to be imposed on those who don’t follow. Not everyone aspires to be a Theravada monk.

If some sects aren’t vegetarian, then ahimsa doesn’t always carry the day. The culture and context matter. I’m not sure about the translation.

I wouldn’t personally ask a woman to have one, but I feel it’s important not to impose my religion on those who don’t believe it. For me the frame of taking away the choice and autonomy of women’s bodies for non-believers doesn’t feel right in this day and age.

There are all sorts of complicated scenarios, and I think when you're in them, the medical setting should be guided by people who understand the medicine and don't have an ideological idea one way or the other. These political judgements from a distance are not really necessary. The political situation is that people who don’t take life preciously are interested in control.