If there's a puppy or seal in my utereus, it's definitely going to get aborted.
A living animal has more rights that the potential for human life.
It follows the same lack of understanding of the concept of "consent" that drives a lot of their policies.
"Pro-choice" is literally that: The belief that a person has the final authority over what happens to their body. We don't advocate one choice or the other, only that the choice be available. We don't fight anti-abortion legislation because we necessarily
want people to abort, but because we want whether they abort or not to be up to
them and not the state.
It's the same reason "pro-lifers" can't fathom how you can both be pro-choice and support criminal penalties for forcing a person to miscarry, or double-homicide penalties for murdering a pregnant woman. Did the person consent to the miscarriage? No. Did the person consent to the murder? No.
The problem is that the two sides aren't fighting for the same type of goal. Pro-lifers are fighting for a specific
outcome, while pro-choicers are fighting for a specific
methodology. However, pro-lifers are quick to conflate their opposition as simply fighting for the opposite outcome rather than for a completely different principle.