"Way back.... when it was wrong for a woman to have a child out of wedlock, and when it was wrong to kill a fetus, abortions were considered immoral and thus, illegal."

In most parts of the world, including the US, abortion wasn't illegal anywhere until the late 1800s. If you didn't want to be pregnant, you went to your local apothecary and got an abortifacent and took care of it, and then you weren't pregnant anymore.

"Why was it wrong for women to have children out of wedlock?"

Because women were treated as sexual property. Note that it was not "immoral" nor illegal for men to have sex out of wedlock. This had nothing at all to do with single parenting and I challenge you to prove otherwise. Taboos on women's sexuality had everything to do with ensuring that women's sexuality was entirely under the control of whatever male had authority over them, be it father, husband, or priest.

"Why are abortions no longer immoral and legal?"

1) Because women are not the sexual property of men, and 2) because women have a right to bodily integrity and bodily autonomy, and 3) because it is the most pragmatic solution to the problem of unplanned pregnancy that we have available at this time, and 4) because we know from experience that when abortion was illegal, women died from attempting to abort unsafely.

"But doesn't this shift the woman's half of the responsibility for getting pregnant onto the father's shoulders?"

Uh, NO. Not in any way. Historically men have taken no responsibility in the majority of unplanned out-of-wedlock pregnancies. If she aborts, she is certainly not giving the man any additional responsibilities. So no. Your argument here makes no sense.

"But is killing a fetus worth the brief pleasure achieved through the sexual act?"

Whether or not a woman should have an abortion is a decision that must rest in her own hands because there are so many complex factors that go into the decision to have or not have a child. You oversimplify -- dramatically.

"Because a woman can chose when to get pregnant simply by waiting until she's married to a man who wants to start a family with her."

First, a great many women simply won't do that. Second, we live in a culture that demands that women present themselves as if they are sexually available. Third, women are fully entitled to sexual self-expression and have the right to determine when and how to exercise their sexuality. Fourth, you have no right to make sexual lifestyle choices for an entire gender. Fifth, rape happens. Sixth, I see no similar moral proscription for men.

"If the couple had acted responsibly and waited until they were married and committed to each other, then there would be no need for an abortion"

Dude, newsflash: Not all married couples want kids. Not all married couples want more kids. Not all married couples can afford kids at any given point in time. Not all marriages are happy. And not all marriages are free from abuse.

"It is thus wrong for a man and a woman to make a conscious choice to have sex out of wedlock and then, when things go wrong, to deny the father any rights to the baby and (on top of that) to kill the fetus."

None of your premises support your conclusion.

I don't like to see women die, moral or immoral but if I had a choice as to who should live, I'd pick the innocent fetus.

Holy. Shit.

Conservative morals are historically oppressive. Conservative morals allowed slavery and impeded the civil rights movement. Conservative values allowed us to go to war with a country that never did anything to us, resulting in thousands of American deaths.

Conservative values kept science in the dark for a thousand years (or so). Conservatives like to hide under the the guise of morality, but their morality is flawed. We can learn from the history of conservative morality: Its immoral.