I don't think that analogy holds water. It's not completely unreasonable, but I can't imagine (and have never seen) a woman treating a pregnancy as a grave threat to her life and limb. Yes, I can admit there must be extreme situations in which this applies, but not in the general sense; a fetus is not a threat in (anywhere near the) same sense that a robber/mugger/intruder is.It brings us back to the point from 500 posts ago: women are called "murderers" when they think they should have the right to protect themselves (their bodies, their livelihoods, or even perceived risks), while men are heralded as heroes when they shoot someone who was no risk to themselves.
Please understand: I'm only rejecting the analogy. I'm totally on-board with women having the moral right to terminate their own pregnancy.
ps. WRT that latter sentence, I don't believe that right should be absolute, but that's a different subject which I wont bring up here. It's the difference between being 100% pro-choice and believing that there are circumstances in which abortion can be a moral wrong/evil.