From my point of view it is very simple and it centers on whether you think a woman should be able to have an abortion "on-demand"; without any explanation other than her wanting it
If you are pro-life; you will be against it. You may be in favour of permitting some certain justified abortions (the common exceptions being rape and danger to the mother's life most notably) as some sort of lesser evil; but if a mother has no special reason for having an abortion, you would not permit it at any point in the pregnancy.
If you are pro-choice; you will be in favour of the woman receiving an abortion; at least during a certain window of her pregnancy. You can get more nuanced on how long this window should be; or some auxilliary details like for example whether or not abortions should receive public funding; or whether or not the mother should attend a counselling session first. But at least during a certain pregnancy window you will allow abortion with no reasons asked.
The line between pro-life and pro-choice is a very simple and clear one to me. There is of course then a lot of nuance in each camp.
What would you consider an abortion ban where the threshold of qualifying for an exception is that there is just some reasonable reason and not some dire or special situation?
What do you mean by "some reasonable reason"?
I do know a handful of pro-life countries have an "economic situation" exemption on abortion; which in my opinion is debatable whether it qualifies as pro-life or pro-choice. There is some grey area for sure, but it is very limited.
"Reasonable reason" just seems like too arbitrary of a clause to me, that would never make it into law.
