I'm getting it from, of all places, the bible. Specifically, the Latin Vulgate - I learned more than enough Latin in two decades of Catholicism to be able to read it, with regular glances at a dictionary. There's some debate as to the quality of the translation, but a) it was the "standard" bible for far longer than any preceding *or* succeeding version, b) it was the basis for most other translations (only recently have English translations been done directly from the greek and hebrew), and c) the translators were far closer to the authors than we are, and so are less likely to distort it to a *modern* worldview.
The Exodus bit is a bit of a stretch - it pretty specifically says "if fighting men hit a woman who is pregnant" as a qualifier ("si rixati fuerint viri et percusserit quis mulierem praegnantem"). I would interpret that as a prohibition on forced abortions, which I don't think many people would argue with, but interpreting it as a blanket ban on abortion is extending things further than the literal text can support.
The Corinthians is a mistranslation on somebody's part. The Vulgate reads "neque fornicarii neque idolis servientes neque adulteri neque molles neque masculorum concubitores neque fures neque avari neque ebriosi neque maledici neque rapaces". I would translate that list as "fornicators, servers of idols, adulterers, the soft, the male concubines, thieves, misers, drunkards, slanderers and the greedy". The New International, and some others, seems to translate "molles" as "homosexuals", which is blatantly wrong (the same word is used as an adjective when Matthew speaks of "soft raiment"). King James translates that as "the effeminate", which most other translations agree with. So that at least relies on God speaking very indirectly to get to the point (if there's one thing Latin has no lack of, it's words for homosexuality - paedico, paedicator, pathicus, irrumator, et cetera). Honestly, given the phrasing, it almost seems like a later addition to the verse.
So yeah, even if I *did* still accept the bible as infallible, I would not be convinced by your citations.