I'm so sorry, dude, I was working all day yesterday and forgot!
Also my school doesn't have online access and its closed on weekends, but the article " Private Bleeding: Self-Induced Abortion in the Twenty-First Century United States." looks up your ally if you have access.
Jeanne Flavin's Our Bodies, Our Crimes: The Policing of Women’s Reproduction in America. covers history from tne 19th century to present day, if you can't get to the library today or they don't have it there's a lot of info to be gained in the first chapter which is up on Google Books Preview:
http://books.google.ca/books?id=5eka...page&q&f=false
There's a review in the Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare that outlines the book and I can PM it to you if you want, but it vouches for the reliability of the book. And how can you go wrong when you open with Teddy Roosevelt?
"There are many good people who are denied the supreme blessing of children, and for these we have the respect and sympathy always due to those who, from no fault of their own, are denied any of the other great blessings of life. But the man or woman who deliberately forego these blessings, whether from viciousness, coldness, shallow-heartedness, self-indulgence, or mere failure to appreciate aright the difference between the all-important and the unimportant,--why, such a creature merits contempt as hearty as any visited upon the soldier who runs away in battle, or upon the man who refuses to work for the support of those dependent upon him, and who tho able-bodied is yet content to eat in idleness the bread which others provide."
The Yale Law Journal has a massive publication on the effects of Roe v. Wade and the shifting of political parties since, how at first Republicans supported abortion more than Democrats, and its only since 1990 that Democrats have been consistently more pro-choice than Repubs. (I can email the excerpt to you) From Pews to Polling Places: Faith and Politics in the American Religious Mosaic documents the shift in politics during the Reagan years particularly for the republicans, they try to appeal to Catholic because they are anti-choice, but also become more anti-choice for doing so. By sucking up protestant evangelicals in the process, Evangelicals became more anti-choice.
Finally, if you want to attack the Bible, there's no passages about abortion. There's this:
Exodus 21:22 When people who are fighting injure a pregnant woman so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no further harm follows, the one responsible shall be fined what the woman's husband demands, paying as much as the judges determine. 23 If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
Which before the eighties was usually touted by protestants as reason enough that abortion is mostly a Catholic issue, the Bible doesn't place an embryo as important as a person.
Nowadays they trot out Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you. Before you were born, I set you apart for my holy purpose...." but then goes on to say he wanted Jeremiah to be a prophet, and his knowing him before he was formed in the womb was singular to Jeremiah, not all fetuses.
I think its interesting how our attittudes towards reproductive rights changes based on who is the one bearing children. We had no problem sterilizing women of colour to "control" poverty, welfare queens were the antagonists of Reagan, and sluts deserve what they get when they get pregnant.
I know you can only cover it for like two minutes, but I'd rather overkill you with info than not provide enough.