Let me take a shot. I think Fred might be saying that, while he might support banning abortion, he does not believe in enforcing the law against the principal in the crime, ie the woman. Considering that the mainstream pro-life position seems to be that abortion should be banned as murder, but women obtaining abortions should not be arrested and prosecuted, you can't really say that this is not a pro-life position.
Personally, I don't think it makes much sense to ban something that you believe is child murder, then support an automatic amnesty for the main culprit (it's a bit like saying you don't believe the mother who contracts a hit on her toddler should be prosecuted, but you support it being illegal to do so). Now, his inclusion of the "family doctor" in his list of those who would be "criminalized" could be taken to mean that he does not believe illegal abortionists should be prosecuted either, but he can probably explain that as a verbal misfire.
I agree, if it’s just a matter of who should be prosecuted, that could still be a pro-life position. I think you’re right that the “mainstream” pro-life position focuses on prosecuting the abortionist, not the mother.
As a matter of fact, Fred’s reference to criminalizing young girls in difficult circumstances is borrowing time-honored pro-abortion rhetoric, which is disturbing in itself.
Fred is in my top two or three among the GOP candidates ... in fact my tentative favorite. I’m trying to decide if he just made an exceptionally clumsy statement or if he has exposed himself as a “pro-life” fraud.