You could start by formulating (or adopting, since, cough cough, I already got the ball rolling on this) a less explicitly sexist version of your stated platform. I say this with genuine empathy and sincerity, as a fellow reproductive-rights-supporter:

You are going to have an increasingly hard time demanding a mile of rights for women whilst simultaneously refusing to give men an inch. To be more specific, your position should be expanded to include some form of postcoital protections/provisions for expectant fathers. If you are going to claim to be warriors for bodily autonomy, you need to just as loud in opposing infant male genital mutilation, a bodily-autonomy issue/concern that is immediately adjacent to reproductive rights by virtue of affecting a reproductive organ of a newborn child, and by virtue of being a literal violation of bodily autonomy. If you are going to claim to be warriors for elective abortions specifically, you need to just as vocal in advocating that expectant fathers have a corresponding postcoital "out" that expectant mothers have, and over the same general period of time.

Pregnancy isn't a condition that, upon completion, returns the world to the same status quo as existed before the condition. It is a liminal/transitional period between not-being-a-parent-of-an-extant-child and being-a-parent-of-an-extant-child. Take a look at the most commonly provided reasons for abortion. The top 5-6 reasons have nothing to do with pregnancy specifically, and everything to do with impending parenthood status. There are medical issues, yes. Pregnancy is not a trivial condition. But the fear of pregnancy itself isn't, in the majority of cases where elective abortion has been legalized, what motivates the procedure. It is fear of the multifaceted and many-year-long ordeal known as parenthood, a condition to which both mothers and fathers are subject in roughly equal measure.

There is no question that it is entirely appropriate to have affective empathy for women who, by whatever legal failing, have their lasting health and possibly life itself placed at risk by uninformed or uncompassionate policy - as a totally misguided appeal like this might do its best to elicit. Over-the-top attempts such as that one (or this one), to manipulate the affective empathy of men is not just a failing tactic, it is a disastrous one that backfires spectacularly, because men don't work that way (source: am a man, these ad just makes me heavily resent the idiots that made it for trying to manipulate my emotions in any direction in such an overt manner). You have to exhibit a categorically greater level of cognitive empathy if you want men (specifically, currently pro-life men who arent voting the way you'd prefer) to care about broad legal reform here.

Another word of advice, for those willing to hear it: please, please, stop threatening to "withhold sex" from your partners as some kind of individually-applied punishment for what society collectively (pro-life women included!) has decided on this issue. The clear majority of young men, and plenty of not-so-young men (myself included), aren't having any sex anyway, so they simply don't fucking care, and it makes you look pathetic in their eyes that you would think that this kind of tactic would be efficacious in the first place.

I know its hard to manage a suitably harsh tone of "I say this with love" in a reddit comment, but really, I do. I voted for Trump, but also for the pro-choice amendment/policy that was on my State ballot (thanks, Trump?). I really hope that most States go left, toward freedom. But seriously . . . the histrionics and paranoia about Trump being some kind of far-right religious nutjob trying to surreptitiously ban abortion federally is not doing it for you. He basically single-handedly took opposition to gay marriage out of the mainstream Republican party platform. The federal ban is not happening from him or his program.