Currently active bills include:
It's even more inconsistent when one realizes that these "personhood" bills are intended to impact end-of-life issues as well. Most bills include phrases that approximately say "all people have the right to defend their life and liberties ... regardless of ... condition of dependency". This is intended to directly counter the pro-choice argument that suggests an embryo may not count as life if it can't live independently of the womb, and simultaneously cover the Terri Schiavos of the world. (TODO: re-find that citation that confirms intent... it was covered in a FAQ of one of the pro-embyronic-personhood organizations)
So, if conservatives want to require hospitals to do everything possible to keep the Terri Schiavos alive, and the same law aspires to cover both birth and death, then shouldn't hospitals also be required to do everything possible to keep naturally unimplanted zygotes alive?
Also, HR 1572, as introduced amends the ND law "Possession of certain materials prohibited" to state that it's only child-porn if "the minor is a born alive child".