One assumes you're not conferring some sort of natural rights to the zygote, are you? Because while it is biologically true that the zygote is an individual member of H. sapiens, it's also not in possession of almost all the features that we generally think of as the features of people.
I can't remember if it was here or elsewhere that I made the following barely apt analogy:
Scientifically speaking, a fertilized ovum is an individual of the species H. sapiens. But that is descriptive, not prescriptive. It's a scientific definition that is applicable within a very limited set of circumstances and is not designed or intended to carry moral implications. Science is really bad at manufacturing moral implications. It can inform moral questions by providing some very specific facts, but those facts aren't the morality, and they are often not really applicable to situations outside of the scientific discipline.
A bug, scientifically speaking, is an insect which is a member of order Hemiptera, comprising cicadas, shield bugs, bedbugs, stink bugs, assassin bugs, and a few other groups with similar mouth parts and wing configurations. Science tells us that the following are not bugs: ladybugs, pillbugs, lightningbugs, gnats, mosquitoes, spiders, millipedes, crayfish, the primary military antagonist in Starship Troopers, or almost all of the other creepy crawlys and flappy flappy moth type creatures that we all call 'bugs' from time to time. Bug spray isn't really designed to repel bugs, but a wide variety of insects and other arthropods. But science doesn't tell us that we have to throw away all our bug spray and instead get wide range of arthropods spray. Because the scientific definition of 'bug' is useful among entomologists and their ilk, but not for normies.
Likewise, science tells us that black, white, east Asian, south Asian, new world native, polynesian, and australian aboriginal peoples are all members of the same species because we can all have viable and fertile offspring with each other. That's a scientific definition that doesn't mean that we should treat white people and black people the exact same way. But it can inform our discussions about whether we should treat white people and black people the same. The science can debunk a bunch of bullshit racist garbage about supposed inferiority of black people, but the science isn't WHY the guy spewing bullshit racist garbage is an asshole. It just tells us that he's an asshole who is spouting garbage. But it's an ethical question beyond the scope of science that tells us that he's an asshole for spewing bullshit racist garbage.
So while science can tell us some things, going the TECHNICALLY that's an independent human organism therefore ABORTION IS TEH MURDERS* route is kind of a misuse of science. Actually not 'kind of'. It's a misuse of science, full stop.
*I do not ascribe this position to DAR, but rather to a bunch of other people none of whom is a regular on this board.
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy
"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL
"Dude she's the Purdue Pharma of the black pill." - Also JasonL