In a thread now closed, a comment was made about pro-choicers being "pro-death." I sympathize with the sentiment, but thought I would offer some things it is pro, besides choice:
1) Pro-Woman. Women sometimes face the loss of a career, their education, or perhaps their safety (women are punished, sometimes physically, by some partners or parents for getting pregnant).
2) Pro-Health. Let's say a woman has a medical condition that will worsen if she continues a pregnancy, or even kill her. Why should she not be able to make a decision about her own health? Conversely if abortion is illegal abortions will continue to be done. Those with means will get theirs safely as they did before abortion was legal. Others WILL risk fertility, serious illness or death with unsafe abortions.
3) Pro-Contraceptive. If abortion is illegal, the state has concluded no one may take a human life. Embryos can’t have wishes or feelings, however… neither does a fertilized egg…. So why not prohibit the morning after pill, or, oral contraceptives, IUD’s etc? These work not just to reduce fertilizations but also prevent implantation of fertilized eggs. And why not extend the restriction to condoms? After all, a sperm and an egg together are as much “human life” as a fertilized egg, and have as much potential.
4) Pro-Autonomy. Most people believe competent adults have the right to make their own decisions regarding medical care, and all the hospital regulations I know of respect this. But many times to date, even in the era of Roe v Wade, women have been denied the right to make their own decisions because they are pregnant. Some have been forced to have blood transfusions against their religious beliefs, some have been forced to have surgeries which hastened their own deaths, some have been confined against their will.
All for the benefit of a fetus with a "right to life."
Others have been punished for having a glass of wine, or for smoking, or have faced additional charges for using drugs because their babies were exposed. While I am appalled at women who intentionally risk harm to unborn children, if the state can deny women the right to do things other citizens may whenever they like, it certainly can reason that it ought to monitor women's diet, exercise, level of activity, etc. Big Brother becomes Big Obstetrician.
If the state knows the fetus has a right to life, it will act against women who are not acting in what the STATE thinks the best interests of the fetus are. This means it will ignore the woman's religion, beliefs, and decisions and FORCE surgery on the woman. The STATE deciding when women need surgery etc and treating women not as people is an Orwellian nightmare (at least to me) but its a rational consequence of a fetal right to life.
These are some of the reasons a person may be pro-choice even if they are ALSO pro-life.