Its supposed to be silly.Insofar as I disagree with the basic premises of the argument, it looks pretty silly to me.
Which I agree with and use an extreme scenario to point out. We all are subject to some bias even objective scientific tests are subject to certain conditions (materials, conditions, ability of testers etc).But at least the logic is consistent. Regardless, I think that even the religious version of the view, to say nothing of the non-religious version, involves totally and flagrantly ignoring differences of just the sort that we use all the time, and use uncontroversially. These differences ground everything from denying certain rights of self-determination to the mentally ill or incompetent, to allowing a woman to decide when to order cessation of medical treatment for her completely incapacitated husband. Why, in abortion and abortion alone, are we suddenly supposed to disregard all these differences? It makes nary a lick of sense.
Its easy to look from a distance and make a judgment and then walk away feeling righteous. It is something very different to have to live with that decision.
If someone doesn't believe in abortion don't get pregnant or if you do don't have one. If you don't like religion don't go to church, don't like gay people don't be gay, but the people who do should have the same ability to experience their wants as those who don't.