To me it isn't, but that's me. I don't believe in precepts as a rulebook or think in terms of violation as a yes-no matter. Sometimes we have clear and simple choices, sometimes lifes pushes us down dark paths where we are faced with dilemmas. The way I see it, the point of the precepts is not to be individual flavours of rules and regulations that you risk "violating", but they all are different aspects of the one and same thing: Letting go.
In my opinion, the advice not to kill is letting go of 2 things: Letting go of taking control over your environment, shape it the way you want it (whether killing a bug in your room or commiting genocide for your regime), and letting go of feelings of hatred or revenge that may cause someone to passionately try to kill, harm or get rid of something or someone, or a desire to judge others, which is also taking control. Every moment we let something live, is a moment we let go.
So, if you'd do the things you describe I wouldn't take them as bad kamma because there is no clinging to particular desires. If you would be saying them because you hate the person, or you hate the unborn baby, and that is sort of your hidden agenda to insincerely promote death, then obviously that is an act of controlling which is bad kamma.
Personally I'd go as far as to say abortion is a virtuous if you do it out of considerations of the wellbeing for all (for example if there is no food and the baby would die slowly), and a non virtuous act if it is done because we have a sense of the ideal live we crave to have ("I want a baby in a year from now, not yet"). I would call the latter 'taking control', which would lead to suffering as it brings us away from the realisation that samsara cannot be controlled or bring happiness.
Just my view. Would be interesting to see others as well. Metta