TL:dr version of my context (Alt-family, YEC, very strongly conservative Christian background leading to moderate Canadian Christian context and went on to study biology and current teach math and science at a high school level)
The simple positions in my mainstream culture are one of autonomy of women’s body and autonomy of life (usually with caveats when life threatening or rape etc).
What is usually missing in regards to the personhood argument is how fragile and inefficient our reproductive process really is as well as the problems arising from our deeper understanding.
It could be that up to 70 % of fertilized embryos perish (implantation errors, miscarriages and a variety of mechanisms) and that sexual activity for low fertile, older, or simply those without protection actually cause more deaths this way. This leads to ethical implications if it’s simply murder after conception. This is not a simple issue even conceptually let alone considering the personal and societal aspects.
There is some attempt to place restrictions by certain groups within Canada but these have largely failed. The current government implemented a funding requirement to agree to not oppose this and other rights which some claim resulted in denials of student funding for Christian organisations.
Another aspect is the force of certain Christian elements behind pro-life positions. Many see cognitive dissonance when groups claim that God created this world with its brutal conditions and yet demands that certain lives be protected.
I have negotiated and discussed this at length with my non-Christian friends and family and everyone approaches this with a multitude of narratives that shape their perspectives.
Whether its punishment versus harm reduction, control versus autonomy, or rights versus roles, there are many different problems.
I think that the common ground is a reduction and a value of all human life (regardless of gender and ability) but the road is difficult as the power dynamics do not allow for much negotiation. I personally a support evidence-based approaches for reduction but science does not answer the larger surrounding ethical questions and many sides will not settle for such solutions.