Everything relies on semantics when you're just talking aobut it. If I jammed your interesting phrase into every applicable slot I (for one) don't think it gets at the root of the distinction. We are talking about distinctions here. Just to define my position, I am partial to philology and have spent many years studying the subject.

I am pro-choice and pro-life.

I am also pro-abortion.

No not really because even that is such a difficult decision.But I'm maybe thinking of when a baby is conceived thorugh rape, especially a young teen or if the baby is to be born so badly mentally or physically deformed that there will be no quality of life.

Women and couples that choose a termination because having a baby does not currently suit their current lifestyle or is inconvenient should be ashamed and hopefully when they do finally want a baby they find they can no longer have any more.

Sounds like poetic justice to me. 

To all the pro life people in here, what exactly gives you the right to enforce your moral believes onto other people? Pro choice doesn't mean people are forced to abort their unborn child, it just gives them the right to make their own decision.

 Letme guess... you're also pro-gaming?

If you accept the Cartesian notion that self-awareness is what it takes to "be", then I think it is difficult to defend abortion, since the nervous system starts to form very early on (some biologists suggest within the first 4 weeks), and sensory perception must qualify to some degree as awareness.

And Gobias, if you think that you could only oppose abortion if you've only just crawled from under a rock, you are clearly a buffoon. It's not about blindly accepting some religious dogma; it's about considering competing and sometimes complex arguments and reaching a conclusion that differs from yours.

I'm pro-death

I'm Pro Life unless of medical circumstances.

 Awareness is not the same as self-awareness. That's really a poor argument.

EEG ratings start at the 12th week. Seems like the best point to consider it.

I don't get people with rape provisons or medical provisions.

It's ok to kill someone just cause someone got raped. Someone not related at all with the rape? By doing that you are basically admitting that the "Child's" life is worth less then the mothers.

It is, more or less, not human.

The same can be said for any abortion really. Even to save a mothers life. You are killing one human to save another. That kind of thing is usually frowned opon.

Even if two people are dying... one slowly with a good heart, and another fast. You can't kill the slowly dying man to give the heart to the one that will die sooner. It's unethical.

As would performing an abortion to save the mothers life if you treat said baby as real person. Even if there is a less then 50% chance of saving them both.

Either your Pro-Life or not. You can't have magical circumstances where the "baby" is no longer a person.

If you make provisions where you can abort the baby, you are making it not human, or at the very least... less human... thereby defeating your entire arguement in the first place.