Okay, this would be much easier to verbally debate than it will be to write...but here goes, the condensed version:
"Abortion" is often couched as a "feminist" issue.
The politics of "feminism" are to promote equality, yet the "right to privacy" (which is found no where in the Constitution) for a woman in this situation creates superiority.
If a woman gets pregnant and doesn't want the baby and the father does...he has no say and no legal recourse.
If a woman wants the baby and the father doesn't...he has no say and no legal recourse (other than pay for the next 18 years).
Do you see the problem with the logic here (taking life/death out of the equation and speaking in purely political-legal terms)? This is not equality. It's a woman's choice until its born and then a $108,000+ payout for the father -even if his choice was NOT to be a father?
Here's the only fair compromise... Your belief ("pro-life" or "pro-choice") goes on your Driver's License. If you should become pregnant and you are pro-life you're entitled to child support, BUT if you're pro-choice and your man didn't want the kid...you gracefully take nothing.
(*Picture taken from a fascinating series over at Zombietime --also check out The women of the two movements)