Sex Selective Abortion should be Illegal.

Everything thing else is fine.

So now you're saying there are multiple possible consequences.  I agree, with the stipulation that abortion is one of them. 

It's not murder if they're not people. 

Just solve it scientifically, after a foetus gets a brain and is aware its alive an abortion shouldn't be legal anymore. Before its a bunch of cells that are building, but have not created an being that is actually alive or aware of that.

I don't like the idea settling this religiously, because the US knows freedom of belief, which counts for religious people and Atheists. Democratically trough a referendum is going to be influenced to much by populism. I am very much pro choice, but I am not a female or a theist, but an atheist male and a liberal. Scientists should answer this question though. Mainly whether abortion is baby murder. Also after how many weeks past impregnation is abortion killing q sentient self aware being.

You've basically stated, more eloquently than I would have done, what my stance is on this matter as well.  I will not regurgitate it, I'll just add to it.

If you strip away everything else from this debate, and all you are left with is the question: "How realistic is it, that abortion could ever be re-criminalized again in the United States?"

The answer is likely never.  Every single facet of our society is working against re-criminalization of abortion.  You would need at least five staunch conservatives on the SC, and that's less likely now than it's ever been before.  Particularly after the death of Scalia.  Even if he were alive, there's no guarantee whatsoever than Roberts would vote with the Pro-life wing.  He's turned against the conservative wing in the past, he could easily do it again. So that's not going to happen.

Beyond the Court, look at our society as it exists right now.  People are more immoral than ever before.  A lot of people even have a general distaste for children, and people with children.  And beyond that, you have a large block of people happily married with children, that are staunchly pro-choice in their political views, even if pro-life in their personal lives.  People generally agree that life matters, but then when you ask them if they could conceive of someone needing an abortion, and whether or not that person should legally be allowed that option, many would say 'yes'.

I do not like abortions. But, well, whatever is evil will eventually become the norm and whatever is good will eventually be illegal. So, who cares, let´s roll.

Lawbreaking is evil
Everything good is illegal
Evildoing becomes the norm: everyone breaks the law to do good!

I'm pro choice. Even though I think abortions can be evil, it is a necessary evil. For one if a girl gets raped it is hard for her to have it. Second, we don't have enough money or resource to go around. We can't let people breed and have babies when they can't afford it and expect everyone else to take care of it.

I am an atheist.

Nonetheless, I question myself if killing a fetus, even unconscious, is moral or not.

I think it is best to answer it with philosophy; what makes baby murder wrong in the first place? Because it should be joticed that a newborn is still at least a year and a half off reaching the intellect of a pig. Few would classify killing the latter as equivalent to a murder. We protect the baby because it will be a human in the future, and it would be wrong to take away the right of said future human to exist (the same reason why murder is condemned in the first place.) But can the same not be said of a fetus? The developpment that occurs in the stomach is a fairly fix process; so we would know just as much what kind of human the detus would have become as for a newborn.

Science can tell us about the characteristics of the fetus at various stages of development, though, which informs our understanding and perhaps lets us decide on whether it is a person.  It's as true that there's no absolute scientific definition of whether something is a person or not as it is true that there's no absolute scientific definition of whether something is green or not.  That's a judgment we as society make, which science informs but does not dictate.  Similarly, science can tell us whether a person in a coma is brain dead or not, but only we can decide if that means the "person" is dead even though the body might be sustainable. 

As for this:  "The answer isn't to illegalize abortions. People are going to get abortions regardless. The answer is whatever minimizes abortions."
That sounds like it could be the reasoning under which some lawmakers try to regulate abortion clinics out of existence while still legally allowing them. 

I see.