Of course not.
I do think that if there were facilities around the country legally slaughtering two-year-olds there would be widespread protests. People would interrupt their day-to-day lives in order to achieve a political end to such a slaughter. Furthermore they would support any policy which worked towards preventing the slaughter. Such a movement would be at a minimum on the scale of the civil rights movement in the 1960's.
The fact that there is no such widespread protest movement and the fact that many "pro-life" individuals continually oppose policies that would vastly reduce the number of abortions (i.e. comprehensive sex education and birth control) suggests that most people can recognize at least some difference between a fetus and a two-year-old child.
I think pro-life people are very sincere. I think so much so that they have done harm to their political party of choice and the electability of their candidates. For the most part, this group is not much of the protest march type. They are trying to work within the system. Many are single issue voters.
Personally, I think republicans would have better election chances if the term abortion was never uttered, but for many republicans it is the single most important issue. Just because they do not believe passing out condoms would help does not mean they are insincere.