What you call "a non-viable cluster of cells", I would call "a human being at a very early stage of development incapable of independent existence". Both descriptions are scientifically accurate. Given a couple of weeks it becomes "a non-viable embryo", which can also be called ."a recognisable but very small human being". Both descriptions are accurate. And so forth.

My point however was not to continue to argue about the rights and wrongs of abortion, but to suggest that it should be recognised that it is not about intolerance of different views, but about a more fundamental disagreement.

Would it make sense to say to an opponent of hunting, or an advocate of gun control, or an abolitionist in the days of slavery, "no one is making you go hunting, or own a gun, or have slaves, why can't you just accept that other people like those things, and stop trying to change minds"?