Personhood is not a well defined term.
The above is strictly your opinion.
Well then let's get into a 18 page back-and-forth about "opinion" because I am calling it somewhere between (and including) belief and knowledge. My computer dictionary defines personhood as:
the quality or condition of being an individual person.
And my previous assertion was less attempt at definition and more attempt at explaining when that condition of being an individual begins.
And put into context of what you are asserting, it would read as:
"I am comfortable with notion of killing that which is visibly conceived and known to have high likelihood of relatively fast becoming human (child). That which (questionably) has personhood."
Other than debates on hypotheticals, I don't judge you. As long as that works for you, so be it. I could ask a serial killer who may happen to participate on an online forum that I do a similar question, and they could, without mincing words, pronounce, "I am comfortable with notion of killing that which is visibly known to be a adolescent human being. I do this because for me, personhood is not well defined, and because I think choice (that I make) are paramount to my existence."
And here in debate area of a forum, I think I might show up somewhat to very judgmental, but away from this 'reality,' it would be visibly different, for me. I'm sure the arguments and retorts would cross my mind, but not be seen as paramount to my existence. Mostly because I realized long ago that I share a planet with people who are quite comfortable killing other beings. Me, I literally have trouble / lack of comfort killing a bug / mosquito that is in my presence. I've done it before, it makes me uncomfortable each time I have done it. I've been around 'friends' who have seemingly no problem with it, and who pose statements along lines of "it was either that mosquito or me." LOL, but it is the logic at work.
Anyway, was just thinking of another way of understanding this issue. Doesn't everyone reading this see pedophilia as wrong? No questions to be asked, and just the concept of it is wrong, wrong, wrong? And isn't the common reason given for why that is wrong is because the child has no capacity to give consent? Well, wouldn't that apply to abortion? The principle of "no capacity to give consent, therefore it is hands off?" I reckon anti-lifers will find a way to get around this conundrum, but is food for thought, especially next time you wanna deem that pedophile as absolutely, morally, wrong.