I dislike Elizabeth's style and lack of tact. She employs that really, loud, obnoxious, overly passionate kind of speaking manner that overwhelms everyone else trying to get their opinions across. That's why she comes across as loco. She creates unnecessary tension.
As for her argument against this pill... ridiculous. Typical one-sided overtly moral, overly religious Republican view. Who decided that life begins when the sperm meets the egg? No one knows for sure. Everyone has their own understanding of when a life begins, and each understanding is steeped in moral tenets. The belief that life begins when the sperm and egg meet, to me, sounds like a moral trap - the conception of life begins immediately, life is sacred, destroying this life is immoral. All the gaps and grey areas seem to be cut out completely to remove any possibilty of countering this viewpoint. What women honestly has a chance against this kind of belief?
She obviously hasn't considered the kind of women who would most proably use this pill - poor, young Black, Hispanic single mothers. These women are not wealthy white women with endless resources like Elizabeth. It's just wrong to deny women who are at an economic and social disadvantage the choice to decide.
In short, Elizabeth as well as a lot of other people, rely TOO heavily on moral reasonings. I've yet to hear any coherent, realistic argument from anyone against terminating a 'life' without it turning into a Bible throwing sermon about God intending this, life meaning that, and what have you. Yes, morals are the foundation of society, such and such, but people are compelled to act by more powerful forces in life (economic, social...)