Were there to be no support in the whole history of ethical and moral thought, were there no acknowledged confirmation from medical science, were the history of legal opinion to the contrary, we would still have to conclude on the basis of God's Holy Word that the unborn child is a person in the sight of God. He is protected by the sanctity of life graciously given to each individual by the Creator, Who alone places His image upon man and grants them any right to life which they have.
"Choice" has no normative value absent an object, but even then it may carry no moral weight. Choosing chocolate over vanilla is a choice without moral consequence. But choosing to abort one's baby clearly has consequences, both for the woman and her child: for the woman, they are traumatic; for the baby, they are deadly. No Catholic can support such a choice. Indeed, in this instance, the very name "Catholics for Choice" is an oxymoron.
Ironically, the Catholics for Choice advertisement in the New York Times focuses exclusively on limiting the choices of Catholics: it wants to deny Catholic institutions the right to a religious exemption from healthcare services they cannot in good conscience countenance.
Here's another irony: there really is no organization called Catholics for Choice. It has no members, and is in fact nothing more than a well-funded letterhead, sponsored by the establishment. Over the years, its biggest and most consistent donor has been the Ford Foundation.
One more irony: bigotry has always stained the Ford legacy. Henry Ford was a notorious anti-Semite, and today the Ford Foundation is the most generous donor of anti-Catholic causes. Indeed, the Ford Foundation is so busy working against Catholics that it is currently funding the vile "ants-on-the-crucifix" video at the Brooklyn Museum of Art.