Is it that far off the point?

Your phone must be doing something different than everyone else's then.

We have probes and rovers on Mars. They've been there for a while.

Which is ironic, because one of the first things analysts discussed afterwards was that Obama made many more references to himself than Trump did.

In his defense, something big kinda came up. Big and pink

Shh, you can't say things like that on the Internet! Progressive liberals don't appreciate differing opinions! (Ironically enough...) Take this down before you offend someone!

My point is that the definition of a human life should not be dependent on factors outside of itself, such as whether we have the technology to perform an abortion, or the technology to make pregnancy (and abortion) redundant.
When that tech becomes available, the pro-choice argument loses a great deal of its footing.
But since the pro-life argument is centered more on the independent rights of the child, it shouldn't matter whether the tech actually exists yet or not -- the reasoning behind it is enough. If abortion should be made illegal then, it's no stretch at all to argue that it should be made illegal now. The only argument against that logic must assert that ethics can be relative, and it's easy to see why people may be inclined to object.