Extreme examples like rape or incest are not adequate justification, and I'm not going to accept that humans simply "make mistakes" as justification for an act that I consider incredibly immoral. Your entire argument sounds like the soft bigotry of low expectations, as if women can't be responsible. This is reminiscent of the argument that if women didn't have abortion clinics, they'd just kill their babies or throw them in dumpsters.

Now I do agree with you there should be a cut off point, which does already exist, so there is no real argument there.

Which is a pro-life stance. Also, I'll refer you to what xNicolex said regarding men discussing abortions.

I don't think anyone can object to that point, but it's more disturbing to allow a child to be born who won't get the love and nurturing it required, dumbing the child on a church or state is not really a good alternative as babies are incredibly sensitive, this option should only exist for situations where there is no alternative.

Almost all newborn babies will get adopted, and our child services aren't a 16th century horror where children are routinely beaten, forced to perform chores all day, and fed gruel - and if they were, this would be an argument for reforming child services, not an argument for abortions.

Yeah, but they should keep it to them selves and govern their own bodies as they see fit, it's not their business what others do if it has no negative impact on wider society.

It wasn't out of their control to become pregnant, they shouldn't have an unrestricted right to forcefully extract and kill their offspring, and abortions have a negative impact on wider society both ways.