Yes, I am male. No, this does not reduce the validity of my opinion. I'm frankly sick and tired of seeing some female (and occasionally, male too!) advocates of abortion deliberately deflecting debate from facts, logic, and reasons by attempting to belittle opposing arguments that are made by males. Firstly, the "logic" that states men cannot legitimately oppose abortion would also apply to infertile females (which would be outright absurd); secondly, that "logic" is sexist; thirdly, I know of no anti-abortion argument made exclusively by males. I don't have to be female to be able to debate ethics and responsibilities. And to assert abortion is a solely female issue is quite simply daft - you rather need a male to become pregnant in the first place, and believe it or not, men have emotional attachment to their children. Just because they don't carry and give birth to it doesn't mean they should be disregarded. I frankly find it amusing that the pro-abortion crowd enjoys to throw around the sexism card when they're the ones clearly defining the gender role of children being a woman's responsibility and fathers having no input. It's the woman's body, yes, but it's also carrying the father's child.
I see a lot of this issue as being one of responsibility. If you have sex, you have to be aware of the consequences, and aware that protection isn't a 100% guarantee against anything. Don't want to have children? Don't bloody have sex. Take some responsibility for your actions rather than shooting first and asking questions later. And I can hear the rabid cries of the pro-abortion crowd now. "What about rape! What about incest!" Three points: firstly, laws are not made on anomalies and exceptions; secondly, one wrong (rape or incest) does not justify another (terminating a life); the third point is made by the next paragraph.
Now, ethics. You definitely don't have to be female to discuss the ethics of abortion. Ethics are, of course, more difficult when you have an emotional attachment to a situation, but often, the more emotionally removed you are, the more calmly and objectively you can assess a situation. So even if males are more emotionally removed from the situation, their consideration of the ethics is quite valid as they are not blinded by emotion. Note that I said "even if". If you ask me, males can have just as strong an emotional attachment to an unborn child and can be equally as emotionally blinded. But if the logic of some pro-abortionists in writing off male opinions is correct, then they're actually just defeating themselves by putting males in a potentially more objective position to discuss ethics. And what of these ethics? I could argue against abortion on religious and moral levels, and I could attempt to argue that abortion is murder, but instead, I will simply appeal to medical ethics. Last time I checked, the medical practice is meant to promote rather than harm life. Abortion - and the abortion pill - go completely against this as their sole intention is to eliminate the existence of a life. It would seem to me that medically, abortion and RU-486 are wholly unethical.
That's my position, and I'll take whatever flames you have. I feel bound by no religious beliefs (though I certainly could offer religious arguments in support of my position if requested), and I feel bound by no gender issues as no-one was ever stopped from discussing ethics and responsibilities just because of whether or not they have ovaries.