Question for Rick re Indiana's Proposed Consent Law

In connection with a proposed Indiana law, Rick asks "in what sense is the statement that 'human life begins when a human ovum is fertilized by a human sperm' anything other than a 'scientific[]' claim?"  Rick: doesn't the answer depend on the basis on which the legislature has determined that women should be informed that life begins when the ovum is fertilized?

The belief that life begins at conception can be based on both religion and science.  I think there is sufficient genetic and other scientific evidence to support the claim, but I personally also accept the claim as a matter of religious belief.  There are people, however, who dispute the scientific claim and who don't accept the religious claim. 

So it seems to me the bigger question relating to Ulmer's statement, is: if the legislature is going to say women must be informed that human life begins when the ovum is fertilized, should it be incumbent on the legislature to have made the determination based on science and not on religious belief?