For the most part, I agree that abortions are wrong. However, the abortion disagreement isn't so much life vs. choice. It's regulated abortions vs. unregulated abortions. Abortions were a fact in society long before they were made legal and they would continue to exist if anything were done about them still.
I support your decision to not have an abortion. I don't support your political beliefs which, if implemented, would only lead to unregulated abortions. To understand the abortion issue you have to understand the circumstances that caused the law to exist in the first place. So again, it isn't life vs. choice. It's a fundamental question about whether a medical practice should be done in a safe and legal manner or not.
You are trying again to frame the argument as an ideological one. You are making it again, to be about life vs. choice. The government may be ideological in nature but it can only pass pragmatic legislation. The world actually consists of problems that can only be dealt with by giving people the means to arrive at just ends. This means preventing abortion via education about birth control and so on such that abortions can be prevented but also giving women a route toward a legal abortion in order to prevent the harsh realities of recriminalizing the practice. Like much of life, our choices are between the lesser of two evils. Your fantasy about a world where people just don't have abortions doesn't exist and it never will. The pro-life movement just creates this false dichotomy because the effort will never reach its desired ends even if it were implemented. A vote for pro-life is, at face value, a vote for unregulated abortions.
To be a little more clear.... you think this question is about morality. To which I am with you on the fact that abortion is wrong. The government however, cannot dictate morality for society. They can only regulate what society will do by prevention and they can only soften the impact of tragic events like abortion by making their procedures safe.