Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice: The political question

My friend Jennifer posted a question on this topic along with her opinion to Facebook recently. She asked for a thoughtful discussion, so I waded gently into those waters. Here's her question followed by my lengthy reply:

Ok, this has been on my mind for awhile and it has made me incredibly sad, frustrated, (insert passionate emotion of your choice). You all know what an animal lover I am as is much of the world. What baffles me is how quick "we" (society) are to stand up and fight for animals, their abuse, their rights, their treatment, and are disgusted by those that kill them, dispose of them, hurt them....etc. Why then are "we" so hesitant to stand up for the killing and disposing of so many innocent babies that (like animals) don't have their own voice??? The comments of passionate disgust I read about the senseless killing of beautiful animals and their unborn or newborn young can so easily be applied to beautiful unborn and newborn babies yet it is quickly labeled "political" and the discussion turns ugly fast. I just don't see why we choose to not fight for the rights for our own precious miracles. We (mothers) do not grow spare parts, we give life to separate beings that unfortunately have their "potential" for a productive life already decided before they can have a chance at all. There *sigh* there's one of my "ings" :) Discuss :)

Reply to Jennifer:

 I think it's good to have public discourse and occasionally redraw the lines. 
I think your question was really about right/wrong or morality on the issue vs politics. I think the answer to that is that it's always right/wrong or morality when you make a decision for yourself and always politics when  the decision is written into law for the rest of us, sometimes the politics are also right or wrong. 
Laws are about drawing lines in the sand, and hopefully the lines represent what most of the citizens agree is the right place to draw the line. Sometimes it's easy to find the right place to draw the line, but sometimes it's not so easy. 
Here are a couple of examples that today seem really easy, but were redrawn in recent memory and against majority opinion in some cases:
Equal rights and desegregation, particularly in Southern states; 
Womens suffrage; blacks suffrage; elimination of slavery; voting age at 18; prohibition and repeal of prohibition.
Here's an example of something that is current, political, and moral, but the controversy is less heated. Most of us agree we should help feed and clothe the poor, that we have a moral obligation to do so, that it's even religious and mandated for jews and Christians by the bible. The country and the states agreed and do provide for the less fortunate via food stamps, housing, unemployment, and other forms of assistance. Lots of us think that the government should continue to provide the various safety nets. And some people who believe it's the right/moral/religious thing to do individually, think the government has no business acting as a charity. And some people who think the government should step into the role of charity, think the government had no business fulfilling that role by funding religiously based charities.

The government also has drawn the lines around life and death. Easy/generally agreed upon lines: animals for food (chickens, pigs, cows, but not horses); euthanasia of overpopulated pets or very ill pets; animal cruelty (fights, farming practices, fur). There are disagreements and repositioning, but generally accepted practices.
More difficult Decisions are made surrounding human life. It's a good idea to continue the discussion and occasionally shift the lines here, and the decisions should weigh heavy on our collective souls. Is it ever OK to take a human life? What is self defense, line of duty, involuntary or voluntary manslaughter, homicide, or capital punishment? If someone is suffering from mortal illness, should they be permitted to accelerate death, and if so, can someone like a physician assist them? Does morality require that every means technology provides to preserve and extend a life must be used (mediciation, blood transfusion, life support) or is an affront to god to intervene? How, when, and by whom should these decisions be made? Every person has a belief on these issues, some guided by their own conscious, some guided by religious leaders, and a lot of gray area between the black and white spaces of life and death. 

On the subject of abortion, you site 53% believing it's wrong as a majority who's opinion should be made law. It sounds pretty black and white and simple. But 53% is not a very convincing majority, it's a number that moves with every poll, and when you get into specifics there's a lot of gray space. What if the baby has a severe deformity that compromises quality of life; or that will end it's life by the age of 2 with great physical pain and very limited physical abilities; or if the baby would die shortly after birth; or die before birth? What if continuing to carry the fetus (ectopic pregnancy, cervical cancer, heart disease, so young that her still developing body can't support a pregnancy) would result in the mother's death; and she has other children who depend on her to provide for their own livelihood? What if the 
Pregnancy is the result of a violent rape and Constant reminder of the terrifying, horrible experience?
Those are all gray areas with lots of space for disagreement even among the most fervent activists for the pro life movement.
There are other gray areas that some people see as pretty black or white, but a woman in that situation sees differently. Women  without stable relationships, women who want to finish school and have careers but aren't there yet, women who are poor and barely able to support the 2 or 4 other children already in their families, women for whom giving a baby up for adoption violates their beliefs.
There's also no consensus on when life begins, or when a life that has begun achieves its humanity. Is it the potential for life in egg or sperm such that sex is only for procreation (twice a month at the time of ovulation and not in between, no hormonal contraception even if it treats another condition, no condoms even if they prevent contagious disease, no masturbation)?  Is a 32 cell embryo alive; in the womb; before implantation; frozen in a lab; if it can be grown as stem cells to treat diseases in other humans? what if it has developed a primitive heart that beats, but an otherwise wormlike appearance? What if it has the features of a person in miniature, with no possibility of survival except in the womb it's attached to?
 These are all moral questions, decisions that will be very difficult for anyone to make, decisions that leave a lot of space for "what if". Decisions that are so difficult and so personal that the law says it has very little business making the choices.  The law has been drawn on a very clear line that at birth, when a baby can survive for a couple of hours on it's own, and when any person can provide the necessary food and love and care, that's the right time for the law to intervene. Before birth, there are laws restricting what stage a pregnancy can be terminated, who will have to give consent, and who will or will not fund the procedure. beyond that, the lawmakers decided they cannot possibly have enough information about each situation to draw the line, and so the most difficult decisions are left to the person who will forever be burdened, for better or for worse, by the choice.

There are other reasons for abortion to be legal even if we have moral objections.  Because Safe and legal abortions prevent injury and infection and death to women who would otherwise risk an illegal and unscrupulous abortion. Because allowing legal abortions doesn't result in there being abortions. Because countries that have legal abortion actually have much lower abortion rates than countries that prohibit abortion.

I'm pro-choice not because I think abortion is great and wonderful and a good option for first line birth control. I think abortion is generally bad. I'd love for it to be used only in the most extreme cases, but I don't think it should be made illegal. I'm pro-choice for all the reasons I just described. I'm pro-choice because I don't see another clear cut line to draw. I'm pro-choice because I don't have any way of knowing what or why someone else may decide to end a pregnancy. I'm pro-choice because this country plays lip-service to sanctity of life but does so very little to support mothers and families financially, emotionally, or in the work place. And I'm pro-choice because this society so often undermines, bullies, and ostracizes mothers who become mothers outside of the ideal 2-parent, middle class, healthy home.
I'm grateful to be a mother at my own timing, with perfectly healthy children, when  my personal goals have been achieved, with the resources to raise my children with financial security in a loving and stable home. I'm also grateful everyday that I haven't had to make the weighty decision between several not very good options, then spend the rest of my days wondering how it might've been if I'd chosen differently. Godspeed to any women making that choice.

Remember I mentioned my belief that abortion is generally bad and should be all but elimated? I think we have an obligation to do everything possible to reach that goal. That starts with comprehensive, age appropriate sex education--including biology, abstinence, contraception of all types, and disease education.  Private, unfettered, and economical access to contraception should be available and also covered by all insurance plans. Pregnant women of any circumstance should be accepted and emotionally supported, not ostracized. Employment protection should be mandated, family leave extended, and financial assistance provided to all mothers at levels that would bring the US up to or exceeding the standards of other developed nations. And that safety net? It should be bigger to ensure that children have full bellies, safe homes, healthy bodies, loving parents, preschool, well funded public K-12 education, and affordable college or vocational training. Sanctity of life shouldn't end at birth.