If you haven't already noticed, I am a classical liberal in my political bent and I most greatly appreciate the political philosophy of the late Harry Browne, who was the Libertarian Party candidate for POTUS in 1996 and 2000. Although I support many of the principles of the LP, I am not a member nor do I particularly support the ideas of Gary Johnson or Bill Weld. However, I tend to vote for libertarian candidates when I am given the option because I want to record my desire for very small government, greatly expanded liberty, and the original intentions of the writers of the founding documents of the United States of America.
Given all of this, my attitude about much legislation these days reflects a desire that federal governments not be run by zealous social engineers of any stripe, right or left. Individual choice is good and should be given as free a rein as possible. Although children should be beholden to their parents until they reach maturity, adults should be primarily beholden to themselves and have very few compulsions placed upon them by external forces such as government. Adults should be able to choose their own actions insofar as they do not curtail the choices of other adults.
Everything above summed up: Choice is good. Additionally, I have a personal attitude that Abortion is bad.
The practice of ending the development of new human life, except in cases where the life of the mother is gravely threatened, is an evil thing in my eyes. My desire is that the rather flippant aborting of new life, often with the excuse of inconvenience or "symbolic" assertion of women's rights, become more and more rare. It seems I am not going to get my wish in this case given the current social climate, but I will keep stating my stance on this subject.
Although I think abortion is an odious act, I also think that each person involved in a decision to abort or not should be able to choose their actions in relation to it. If a woman wants to abort, that is her choice to make. If the doctor involved doesn't want to perform this abortion, they also have that choice and a more willing practitioner could be found. If the biological father is an adult and desires to curtail the abortion and take responsibility for the birthed child, that choice must be considered as well and the justice system may need to be involved to resolve any conflicts over the shared pregnancy (the woman didn't conceive without help!) and its outcome. As (potential) children are beholden to their (potential) parents, principles of choice dictate a rejection of any appeal to the "rights of the unborn" in a purely pragmatic sense in this case - the waters are muddy enough.
I repeat, I think abortion is an evil thing. However, people have the right to choose to be a party to abortions. Further, I really hope that these people will choose not to pursue abortions, especially as an answer to relatively small embarrassments and social inconvenience. This is a very serious decision to make, often wrapped in large emotional and religious consequences and associated responsibilities.
I view very dimly those who "promote" abortion for any reason beyond a clear threat to the individual woman's life. Any coercion used to encourage an abortion impedes a woman's ability to choose their acts in full understanding of their culpability. Legislators that authorize the use of public funds to subsidize abortion and its promotion are just as liable to consequences as direct promoters. Funding for abortion services can, with greater integrity, be raised from sympathetic donors with full understanding of the activities being funded. The act of taxing people opposed to abortion for its subsidized provision is, at its heart, unjust and foul. The tenets of liberty are offended by the forced subsidy of abortion by those who oppose the practice (ala Obamacare).
Women still have choice - one can choose not to have an abortion. Sadly, forces are working diligently with the young, the poor, and the troubled (feeding on ignorance) to convince them to hate children (Baby Think-it-over), to have (protected) sex like drunk monkeys (I apologize if I offend monkeys), and to abort every "unwanted" (actually every) conception. These are veiled cousins to the old eugenics and sterilization programs that tried to eradicate "undesirable" groups, like blacks. Such abortion promoters are actually enlisting each woman's help in the destruction of her own culture, race, and society!
May I offer a warning to my Judeo-Christian/Islamic friends? God is really weird about a few things - one of them is taking human life. He punishes "fooling around" with non-productive sex and aborting sexual "accidents" just as strongly as he does murder. If your spiritual leader is too shy or liberalized to say so, I will: You put your soul in serious jeopardy through the flippant disregard for God's stance regarding intimacy, conception, childbearing, and human life.
You can choose to honor life and use your procreative powers appropriately. You can stop supporting abortive practices yourself and implore others to do the same. The point is that we don't use instruments of force, like government, to make others do things in a fashion that pleases us.