I can't overspecify everything. I think that it should have been obvious when I was referring to being pregnant I was talking about a fetus. Your criticism was that this argument does not necessarily apply before the stage where a fetus exists. It seemed like you were mincing words.
You are the one mincing words and completely losing the context. The question we are addressing is whether or not consent to sex is consent to pregnancy. I say that it is not but, even if that were the case, consent to the possibility of a pregnancy is not consent to carrying that pregnancy to term. You responded with the idea that ending a pregnancy is necessarily killing a fetus - presenting a false dichotomy - continue the pregnancy or kill the fetus. The reason why this dichotomy is false is because a pregnancy can be ended prior to the existence of a fetus.
It isn't.. No matter how you twist and mangle logic with weird scenarios the FACT that consent to one act is NOT consent to any other act remains firm.