I've heard Exodus 21:22-25 used in support of abortion in some cases, at least to protect the life of the mother. The argument is that if the negligent death of the mother is punishable by death while death to the unborn is merely punishable by a fine (if the premature-birth interpretation is false, anyway), then the fetus must not be an actual person.
Does this reasoning go too far in light of verses 29-32? In this section, if an ox's owner negligently causes someone's death due to not properly addressing the ox's violent tendencies, then the owner can be put to death—but the owner apparently can't be put to death if the ox kills a slave, which instead is punishable by a fine.
Each passage involves causing someone to die out of negligence, and each case can involve the death penalty for the person who acted negligently—but not if the victim is a fetus/slave (again, unless the premature-birth interpretation is used in verses 22-25, anyway). Therefore, should we conclude that a slave is not a person? If not, then is the parallel reasoning used in verses 22-25 flawed in some way? What if the different penalties merely imply a lesser status on the part of the slave/unborn rather than necessarily disproving personhood?
Info: My question is similar to Exodus 21:22–25 Relevance for the issue of abortion. However, my question focuses specifically on the reasoning used in the passage and what parallel reasoning would imply in verses 29-32.