I'm reading the thread and whilst there are posters who are giving considered and thoughtful opinions there is also a lot of anger and hatred of NF etc al being expressed, this is how they will win. I understand but it will not help win the argument.
We can be angry that women have to fight this battle again or we can plan to win.
We need the facts, they are on our side.
Abortion until term without a medical reason is not a popular idea, anyone arguing for that will alienate most people. Don't make people choose between reduced abortion access and abortion until term. We will lose.
There is no case for altering existing provision by reducing terms or access because as OP points out, most terminations happen at less than 10 weeks.
The viability argument for reducing limits to 22 weeks doesn't stand up to scrutiny. I'm reluctant to post the statistics about survival rates and severe, life long disabilities in babies born before 24 weeks but at some point we will have to overcome any squeamishness about appearing insensitive so that sensible, fact based discussions can take place.
We need to be prepared to address claims about late term abortions being permitted for things such a cleft palate, I have heard this argument. Anti choice campaigners claim that the medical necessity provisions allow women to abort babies who have minor, correctable birth defects as late as the third trimester. In the UK the number of late term abortions which take place each year is in single digits. Those abortions may include babies with correctable birth defects but the important point is that the abortions don't take place for that reason. Those defects often occur with much more severe and unsurvivable problems and that is why a woman may abort later in the pregnancy.
I could write a lot more but this is just an example of the kind of evidence we need. There are many more very legitimate arguments for maintaining abortion access as it is, we need to be prepared.