I think you're missing something here. My post -- the one that caused your imitial response -- was directed at a poster much earlier in this thread. This poster had told a man whose wife had aborted a child in order to be treated for the malignant melanoma that eventually killed her that God demanded more of him. So, basically, I was responding to that "small minority" whom you think does not significantly impact the debate. Perhaps they don't -- we'll agree to disagree -- but they are actually pushing me away from the pro-life movement with their "all or nothing" approach.
For starters the operation to save a woman's life described in that post isn't considered an abortion in medical terms. When a doctor is faced with saving a pregnant woman's life and the pregnancy itself is a complicating factor unless the fetus is too immature to possibly survive outside the womb he/she will view both mother and child as patients and do everything possible to save them both. That is a quantitative difference in intent from abortion where the primary goal it to kill the baby.
You can let a small minority of Pro-Life people who support a position that never was the law and is only theoretically an issue in a possible future beyond the end of Roe v. Wade push you away from supporting life over destruction of life if you want to. That is your choice. I prefer to deal with the here and now not what ifs.