If abortion is the killing of an innocent human being, which is what the pro-life side asserts, there is no such thing as a "safe" abortion. Its important to understand where opponents of your view are coming from otherwise there will be a communication disconnect which helps noone.
I'm aware that many pro-life proponents anchor their beliefs in the idea life begins at conception, and therefore abortion is murder, but many (more?) people believe differently. I'm sympathetic to the concept that "abortion is murder" and anyone with that viewpoint should be 100% on board for doing everything we can to reduce the need for abortion, such as robust sex-education starting at an appropriate age (12 or 13), availability of contraception and counseling to discuss concerns, ... (these measures reduced abortions in Colorado). Unfortunately, many pro-lifers are also against contraception and sex education, and other measures which would reduce the need for abortions, which muddies their underlying intentions, and leads many to believe that their primary concern has more to do with controlling women and inflicting their religious beliefs on others.
If we assume there is an underlying intention, maybe we shouldn't assume that the anchor of their beliefs is in the idea that life begins at conception. The question I would ask is what outcomes they want to have and what negative outcomes they want to avoid. A lot of religious views seems to me to be anchor to the old view that children only life support is their family, and thus the most critical aspect is the focus on a core family that guaranties that the child will survive. There also seems to be a bit focus on inheritance and family lines, issues which is not trivial but significant less than when much of those religious text was written.
