Well, my confusion here is that I don't separate the two in my own mind, but having now finished the rest of your article (including what you are actually referring to with the word "morality") I think I better understand your point and fully agree with it.
I spoke earlier on this thread over how I believe that the prolife movement would benefit greatly from having advocates emerge from demographic groups not normally associated (according to stereotype) with the prolife movement. I also believe, as you have suggested, that cultivating this would be beneficial.
But back to the other half, which is speaking the language of those one wants to persuade. Here is a link to an article from Dr. James Dobson's Citizen magazine. What comes to my interest is what groups such as A Woman’s Choice Resource Center are doing. Groups like this are mainly the effort of religious conservatives. But they are not trying to persuade people with the religious arguments. One tool they have begun using is science, by purchasing '4D Ultrasound' machines, which allow them to show women live-action images of their unborn child. Their own, almost like a movie. Not the hard to see, ambiguous blod that traditional ultrasounds present. This, with it being the woman's real baby, in real time.
That's a language to which most women of any religious persuasion are going to respond.