I don't hear much "hue and cry" about government restrictions on 'personal choice' regarding suicide and organ selling.
I would think government should allow for religious liberty exemptions. Deciding where/whether the limit(s) exist, IMO, can be problematic.

"why isn't abortion??"
Regardless of my position, I don't claim/imply/infer that there isn't another (potential/not-yet-born) life involved for which government(s) claim legitimate interest(s).

"gender identity"
Regardless of my position, some other folks have (some, somewhat) legitimate interest(s) (i.e. privacy) when non cis folks behave against their wants/interest/principles. (i.e. locker rooms/bathrooms, sports)

@FearlessFly "Potential" life is a misnomer. Every sperm or egg is a potential life (that's why the Catholic Church says every sperm is sacred)(no, wait, that was Monty Python). There is a line between fetus and human being, which medically speaking is when the forebrain develops. The body itself aborts spontaeously all the time. It's not he government's place to decide whose health is paramount, the woman or the unborn child.

I don't think trans people are going into bathrooms/locker rooms/ wherever to get a gander at their cis counterparts' dangly bits. This is the exact same argument that was made about gay people and it doesn't hold water.

@Paul4747 Without disagreeing with your positions . . .

I contend that, even irrespective of religion, government(s) have legitimate interest(s) for 'rule-making', regardless of those of us who have counter arguments.

Well said. Thanks for saying it.