No, he wasn't.
But these were life forms created from him (and Pulaski) without their consent.
My question stands. Would you consider it murder if a woman aborted a baby she became pregnant with after being raped?
It's not the right analogy. Would it be murder if a man aborted a baby when a woman became pregnant after stealing his sperm? I don't know the answer, but it's certainly a different question.
Anyway, your question depends on the trimester it's in and the law of the country we're talking about, so it's not the easiest thing to answer. My view tends to be the reason for the pregnancy is irrelevant and only becomes relevant if "fault" matters (i.e., that women can only have an abortion if they weren't at fault for getting pregnant in the first place). I think that's a mindset about punishing women for sex that's antiquated. But that's my personal opinion, which isn't exactly the answer to your irrelevant question.