"...-the strata explained by evolutionists as formed over aeons is alternately explained by catastrophism as in a global flood.

No, it is not. You simply cannot create the strata as we find them today by means of a 'flood'...no matter what size. It-don't-work-that-way!

I'm sorry, pete from 7 stars, but you are beginning with the assumption that stuff in the bible is literally true, and then twisting, shoehorning, stuffing and forcing all subsequent information into compliance with the biblical model. You do this by taking a book that has been edited, translated, revised and altered by men...for political, personal, and theological purposes... and then USING what others have told you about that book, and your own flawed reading & interpretation, to claim things about the physical sciences (including biology) in order to uphold your own 'assumption' that I mention in the beginning of this long paragraph.
   That is called 'circular reasoning', and it includes the fallacy of < a href=http://www.fallacyfiles.org/afthecon.html>"assuming the consequent".

You can construct a nice, clear logical argument of the form:

"IF God made us and IF he decided we should have 'immortal souls' and IF he inserts a soul into every fetus at conception, THEN we should not tamper with God's plan by occasionally terminating a pregnancy."

...but all of this depends on those big "IFs"...and the problem is, *IF* any of your assumptions are incorrect, *THEN* the rest of your conclusions are not supported. There is a logical law about this: "From false premises, anything follows!" This means that, if any of your assumptions are incorrect, anything 'could' be claimed about them, and you will see in the hundreds of religions and various interpretations OF religions, that many, many strange and incompatible things HAVE been claimed. They cannot all be right.

No one can force you to believe any of this... no matter how we explain science, but...no one can force anyone else to accept your basic premises either.....so, in matters such as making decisions about abortion, the only way to proceed is for everyone to decide personal matters personally. When you say "... people of other convictions are entitled to campaign (against abortion)provided it is done lawfully.", you are using a concept of "lawfully" which was designed BY those who accept all those "IFs" I noted. This is unfair and interfering...especially when the decision is very hard to begin with.

Believe what you wish, but be VERY careful of how you present those beliefs to others who may not buy into YOUR basic assumptions.
"Belief" is a valuable word....it means accepting stuff that is NOT 'proven'. If I told you that I "believe" that elves live in my garden and chase away the neighbors cats, you'd see my point quickly.

...so...I didn't intend to type so much, but it is difficult to make certain points without elaborating.