With all due respect, I disagree with the premise of the piece. Pro-lifers regularly advance all the arguments you seem to think they ignore. The recourse to biblical proscriptions against abortion has a far less prominent place in staple pro-life arguments than it has had in years past. The main argument has shifted to the measureable negative emotional and physical effects an abortion has on the woman who has one, and to exposing as false, based on scientific knowledge which in turn is based on the rigorous application of logic, the unsupportable contentions that a child in the womb is just a "part of the woman's body" or a "mindless piece of protoplasm."
If the breast cancer/abortion link has not received the attention it deserves in the mainstream media, it's not because pro-lifers have ignored the story. It's because pro-choice activists and their confreres in media have worked hard to spike it.
I don't understand the story's premise, either. For example, a prominent pro-life talk show host here focuses almost exclusively on the medical evidence that fetuses are indeed human and what abortion does to them, downplaying his Catholic faith.
I enjoy debating the logic, because at root the pro-aborts have only two arguments, that the fetus is not human (demonstrably wrong) or the utilitarian argument that some human life should be sacrificied to enhance the quality of life of other humans. Once you get them to admit to the utilitarian argument, you've got them, because the consequences are truly ghastly - its the same argument the Nazi's used to justify the Holocaust.