I am pro choice because I do not believe that someone has the right to unconditional life if they can live only at the expense of someone else's body, as is the case of a fetus and a pregnant woman. A woman's right to control over her body is paramount to a fetus's right to exist.
That being said, I get really tired of listening to the flawed, illogical arguments that are commonly given by both sides of the debate. Here are some of the most annoying:
"Abortion should be outlawed because a fetus is a person."
How do you define 'person?' At what point does the fetus become a person? Is a single cell a person? Four cells? Also, this argument assumes that people have an unconditional right to life, which they don't.
"Abortion should be outlawed because the bible claims that fetuses (feti?) are people."
A more complete version of the previous argument. Check again. The bible does not say this anywhere. There are passages in the bible from which this could be inferred, but it is certainly nor clear-cut. For most of the church's history abortion was not considered immoral and a fetus was not considered a person. Christianity's 'pro life' stance is a recent development. In any event, it doesn’t really matter since we (in the united states and most other countries) live in a secular democracy.
Abortion should be outlawed because you might be killing the next (pick your favorite famous person)
True, but you might also be killing the next evil dictator or notorious criminal. There is no way to tell and each is equally likely.
Abortion should be outlawed because there are many families who want to adopt children.
This is not entirely accurate. There are many families who want to adopt healthy white children. If a child has some sort of health problem or is a member of an ethnic minority, it is unlikely that they will be adopted before they become adults. In any case, surely a woman could not be expected to give birth for the convenience of someone who is incapable of having their own child.
"Abortion should be allowed because the world is overpopulated."
The problem isn't that the world is overpopulated, it's that people can't manage their resources properly. This is not an argument in for abortion, it's an argument for better resource management. Note also that if this argument were valid it could just as easily be applied to justify the killing of living adults.
"Abortion should be allowed because it prevents children from being born into abusive homes."
Again, this argument could just as easily be applied to justify killing children who are already living in an abusive home. In fact, it would be more applicable, since there would be certainty that the child is living in an abusing environment rather than a mere possibility.
"Abortion should be allowed because if it is outlawed women will turn to 'back ally' abortion clinics where conditions will not be as safe."
This argument does not address the moral acceptability of abortion. Few people would accept the argument that 'bank robbery should not be outlawed because it would make bank-robbing much more dangerous to the robber.'
"It's a slippery slope; if you outlaw abortion, soon the religious nuts will be herding atheists into concentration camps."
The slippery slope argument is considered to be a logical fallacy. It is possible to outlaw abortion without restricting other freedoms. There is no way to show that theocratic domination in an inevitable (or even likely) consequence of outlawing abortion.