I may be the first whose views might switch as a result of this discussion. I've been strongly pro-choice all my life (I'm in my 50s), but Chrystysprite, the doctrinnaire pro-choice advocate here, is making me reconsider my stance. After all, I'd always felt that the anti-choice position was based primarily on religion, a leap of faith, unwillingness to consider science etc. Yet, Chyrsysprite's arguments conclude with him/her proclaiming just the opposite: although pro-choice himself, he comes right out and says it's actually the pro-choice case that is primarily a matter of faith.... which when push comes to shove, it must shove aside facts, science and everything else. I think I have some difficult thoughts and choices to make from here on.
(Footnote: I already went through this process vis-a-vis geopolitics and pacifism after 9/11, and believe me, realigning one's attitudes and admitting one's been wrong all one's life is no picnic! You must find a whole new set of friends, for one thing - because even the most courageous and honest among those you knew, won't be up to taking on the same task themselves....)