I am pro-choice. That said, I find the vast majority of the rhetoric employed by the American pro-choice movement fallacious at best, and rather indefensible. It is these equivocations, in my opinion, that have partially led to the degrading of the national discourse.
To me, the issue boils down to one, and only one point: is a fetus an entity that deserves to be accorded the rights we accord infants? That is it. There is no “my body, my choice” or “only in case of rape or incest”; if a fetus is a person, you don’t kill it. If a fetus is not a person, you can treat it as befits you. The point that the majority of the pro-choice movement misses is that the pro-life side does not necessarily (though may occasionally) intend to gratuitously limit women’s freedoms, but rather, they maintain that the life of a human being trumps any right’s to one’s body. If a baby becomes accidentally superglued to my leg, I can’t beat it to death and say “my body, my choice”.
Pro-choice activists have to realize that if they intend to be honest rather than rhetorical, this is not only the hinge of the issue, but indeed even the issue itself. Though I am pro-choice, I am so only because I believe that a fetus is not sentient enough to be accorded the rights of a human-- if I am ever sufficiently convinced that it is, I will passionately switch sides.
From where I stand, pro-lifers are on the wrong side of the right argument; most pro-choicers are on the right side of a completely irrelevant argument.