Rather than repeating the same kind of argumentation that Dancona already summarized and characterized as extreme (albeit not the most extreme) you would be more convincing if you actually addressed his points.

For instance, by painting the other side as "those who view women as brood mares and baby ovens", you do exactly, precisely what he is criticizing. You don't even bother to support your claim. It's 100% demonization, 0% evidence.

Do you explain why how long a woman has been pregnant should be a factor? No.

You attack him for not grouping "all" with "most", when his points included the fact that all and most are not the same thing.

Do you address the nature of the various different groups that have different positions on abortion or just go for the most extreme (e.g. Southern Baptists)?

Do you address the issue of abortion after the baby is viable if delivered?

You just provide a perfectly clear example of what Dancona was talking about without even making a good case for your (apparent) position. You might be able to, even (you certainly ought to be able to make a decent case against Dancona's stated position)--but not if you just do all the things he said are a bad idea and not even argue for why they're a good idea instead.