"surely one cannot condone terminations/abortions/murder simply as a result of personal negligence?"
Firstly, stike murder from that list, since obviously those who support a woman's right to abortions do not accept the emotive term murder is a legitimate description and it doesn't move the argument on to introduce it. Secondly, one certainly may not approve of abortions being used as a form of contraception (I certainly don't) but just because someone has got pregnant through negligence, it hardly means that they're otherwise inherantly capable of providing the necessary loving home and upbringing a child deserves.
"However, in a similar vein to the anthropomorphism issues raised in a previous question, I do query whether those who support abortion as a women's right refuse to project human characteristics onto a foetus simply because it is unseen. "
My wife is currently 13 weeks pregnant with a very much wanted child and I have imagined every stage in its development and know exactly what is developing at any given time, but I am nevertheless absolutely in favour of women having the right to an abortion should they find it necessary to do so.
Wouldn't you agree it's rather facile to imply that those who support the right to abortion are unfeeling, lacking empathy or otherwise inhuman, and rarely adds much to the debate.
To end on a high note; as Bill Hicks said, if you're so pro-life, why don't you lock arms and picket the cemetarys?