I am aware that it's from a quote. It's from a quote you chose

I enthusiastically agree that there should generally be much higher responsibility for content placed upon quoters.

deontologist...consequentialists...What is your point?

The unpersuaded middle? Those who had never considered the question? Error theorists?

Am I mistaken in thinking that anti-abortion activists do seek to make abortion illegal, and just don't do it by charging women with crimes the scope of which does not legally apply? Usually?

IIRC I once saw a youtube video in which a journalist or filmmaker or whoever interviewed people picketing against a clinic of some kind. Many had never even considered what punishments there should be for doctors or women. One woman's gut response to the question was to propose making abortion a special illegal category of murder without imposing any legal penalties, others had different initial responses but a great many hadn't considered the question at all.

Less shocking was that those who had at least considered it had very superficial responses, not at a very deep level of thought by even their standards.

please do note that there is some subtlety here.

I do not think it matters how well one draws a boundary if one ultimately has to bite the bullet (?) and say that some things adjacent in idea space are categorically different from each other, which is a very important way for things to be different, while other things very distant in idea space do not differ from yet other things very far from them.