Yes, I want abortion to be "rare" (and why it doesn't matter what I want).
Why?
Because as safe as abortions are, most forms of contraceptives are even safer.
Because as inexpensive as abortions are, most forms of contraceptives are even less expensive.
Because as non-time consuming as abortions are, most forms of contraceptives are even less time consuming.
That said, I also support abortion on demand for any woman who wants one without judgment or recrimination. Abortion is a matter for her and her doctor to discuss, and for her to decide, based on the facts (not anti-choice myths) of that woman's particular situation.
So does my desire, as a man, that abortions be a rare event have any practical purpose in this conversation other than expressing a sincere concern for the welfare of the woman? No.
I want women to use the safest, cost-effective, and convenient forms of birth control possible, but I want poor people to manage their money better and I want the ill to take better care of themselves. I want a whole slew of things, in the name of helping people, but I don't try to get laws passed that force them to take the actions I desire, nor do I generally believe it's my place to tell them how to handle their personal affairs.
As someone not directly affected by a woman's decision whether to have an abortion, I can sit here and pontificate on how better access to contraceptives is the way to go - and I'm likely right. But when I do, I should expect to read several posts telling me to mind my own body and stay the fuck out of theirs.
So for every man out there defending the "rare" in "safe, legal, and rare," understand that you're entitled to your beliefs, and you may not even be wrong. But it's not our place to lecture women on what they should and shouldn't do, just as it isn't their place to tell us whether to get a vasectomy or take Viagra.
When you have the issue, you get to make the decision. Anyone else telling you what you should do isn't really pro-choice.
= new reply since forum marked as read
I knew I'd be stepping into a hornets nest with this post but I seem to have mostly angered those I agreed with.
Maybe I have a unique talent for that. 
How can be fight our own ignorance if we don't admit it exists?
The problem is every time I overcome one ignorant belief, I find two more that propped it up. 
It's hard to blame them for disagreeing with things that I don't even agree with, myself. I know my prejudices are wrong and while I work to eliminate them, I can only admit they are there and try extremely hard not to let them affect others.
I think most of us have a prejudice that makes us believe we can manage other people's lives better than they can. In fact, I think that reality television is premised almost entirely on that belief. As a society, we love to judge other people's lives and think about how we would do better in their situation.
I admit my guilt in the OP but go on to say that my prejudice doesn't give me the right to tell someone else what they should do (which as you noticed is different than trying to tell people what the MUST do). Since it's not my body, or my life, it's offensive for me to try to tell others they should try to keep abortion rare. It's not my place because I'm not there.
Anyway, thanks again. 
I've always spouted the "safe, legal, and rare" talking point because ... well, I don't know why, really. I guess it's because I tend to think I make better decisions than others - which is patently untrue. It was likely a bad decision to even make this OP. 
Unfortunately, logic can live with ignorance and does in all of us to some extent. My empathy for the pain of others can overcome the logic that I can't completely understand their situation. It's not for me to judge them or to try to manage their lives for them.
While I knew that logically, the OP and the resulting thread has helped me sort it in my mind a bit better.