Arguments in favor of legalizing abortion are often framed as supporting a woman's right to choose. In that case, why do the "pro-choice" arguments ultimately boil down to hypothetical scenarios like "What if she is raped?" or "What if she isn't financially able to support a baby?". Hypotheticals create a specific, narrowed down situation. For this reason, they don't argue whether or not a woman should have the choice. They argue that a woman should abort in some situations in which they have NO choice, which is totally different. I personally think there are a lot of other options in these scenarios besides abortion, but that's just me. My point being that hypothetical arguments to justify the "pro-choice" stance are automatically invalid, because they are strictly anti-choice. If these hypothetical arguments ceased, then I believe the abortion debate would be much more productive.