Questions for pro-lifers

[Cleon]

Not true. It is possible to feel very strongly about something and yet overcome those passions to find the truth. That is what critical thinking is all about.

Yes, but you left out the "use of terms that are completely invalid, but put a nice emotional twinge on the subject" bit.

Don't know how you can conclude I have "a sheer lack of ability or willingness to look at the issue rationally". You seem to be a little irrational yourself in choosing to be miffed over a term I used and ignoring evidence that I actually can think rationally on this emotional subject despite my prejudices.

Yes, yes, I'm very proud that you reconsidered your analysis of abortion statistics. Yay for you.

It's not a matter of being "miffed." It's a matter of the fact that "pro-abortion" is completely invalid as a term, and used--deliberately, I might add--to put some sort of malevolent cloud over the abortion rights movement. It's an emotionally-laden word that is totally irrational and false. Much like "anti-choice," which is used by some abortion-rights proponents to describe the anti-abortion movement. Or even like "pro-life," which is used by the anti-abortion movement to put a warm and fuzzy label over themselves.

 

[Cleon]

I think that's going just a little bit far. People adopt rhetoric all the time without intending it literally. Indeed, the abortion debate is one of the biggest sources of propaganda in the U.S. today, on both sides.

On that, I agree 100%, though I would say that the war rhetoric is a close second.

That said, it would be nice if Luke conceded that there is no such thing in reality as a "pro-abortion movement," except perhaps for the Bush administration's idiotic hamstringing of federal support for sex ed programs.

Except that "pro-abortion" is a deliberate attempt to manipulate the issue with emotionally-laden terms. He reduces it to "pro-abortion" versus "pro-life." You're going to tell me that indicates a willingness to examine it rationally?

 

[TragicMonkey]

Sheesh. Not everyone uses terms out of an agenda. Sometimes they just grab the handiest words without realizing they mean something more to some people. Like apparently how you pronounce "Tanzania" can be construed to mean something about your politics. I don't know what, so I'm liable to offend without meaning it.

 

[Cleon]

Sheesh. Not everyone uses terms out of an agenda. Sometimes they just grab the handiest words without realizing they mean something more to some people. Like apparently how you pronounce "Tanzania" can be construed to mean something about your politics. I don't know what, so I'm liable to offend without meaning it.

I honestly think it's impossible to use "pro-abortion" without knowing it's emotionally laden, incorrect, and all-around invalid.

 

[American]

Innocent people have been executed and unless you are willing to state that your justice system is %100 perfect at all times you must admit that more innocent people will be executed.

Its ok to kill innocent adults but not embryos?

Good law and policy is a matter of statistics. There will always be sad cases no matter what practices are applied.

So yes, it's fine to kill a few innocents by mistake, and it's easy to exploit that fact and distort the very just and sound principle of executing convicted murderers. You might otherwise reason that medicine should not be practiced because nurses and doctors occasionally screw up and kill their patients.

 

[toddjh]

Except that "pro-abortion" is a deliberate attempt to manipulate the issue with emotionally-laden terms.

But it may not be his deliberate attempt. If he is adopting someone else's rhetoric without examining it too closely, it may not reflect on him personally. Give him a chance to respond (minus the inflammatory rhetoric of your own) before you assume.

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt because he does seem quite rational to about abortion to me. He and I disagree about at what point a fetus should be considered deserving of legal rights, but I can live with that. Apart from that, everything he's said has made sense to me. In principle he may disagree with us, but he concedes that a certain number of abortions is unavoidable, and the way to reduce that number isn't to ban them, but to promote good sex ed. Though his motivations are different, his "agenda" does not appear to differ significantly from our own.

Luke, would you mind weighing in? Do you really believe "pro-abortion" is an accurate label for those who wish to keep it legal?

Jeremy

 

[TragicMonkey]

I honestly think it's impossible to use "pro-abortion" without knowing it's emotionally laden, incorrect, and all-around invalid.

It makes me think of "pro-football", which only confuses the issue. Sometimes a stream of consciousness is easily diverted into a creek of whatthehell.

 

[Luke T.]

I honestly think it's impossible to use "pro-abortion" without knowing it's emotionally laden, incorrect, and all-around invalid.

Or it just may be a sign of my age. I don't recall hearing the term "pro-choice" until long after the term "pro-abortion" had been in use. I use "pro-choice" and "pro-abortion" interchangeably and about equally as much.

Same with "anti-abortion" and "pro-life". They both mean the same thing to me. And I don't recall hearing "pro-life" unitl long after the term "anti-abortion" had been in use.

 

[Luke T.]

Well, there you go. Some etymology:

pro-choice
"favoring a right to abortion," 1975, from pro- + choice.

pro-life
"opposed to abortion," first attested 1976, from pro- + life. Hostile alternative anti-choice is first attested 1978 in Ms. magazine (see pro-choice).

Both terms were not used until years after Roe v. Wade.

Edited to add source: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?l=p&p=31

 

[TragicMonkey]

Or it just may be a sign of my age. I don't recall hearing the term "pro-choice" until long after the term "pro-abortion" had been in use. I use "pro-choice" and "pro-abortion" interchangeably and about equally as much.

Same with "anti-abortion" and "pro-life". They both mean the same thing to me. And I don't recall hearing "pro-life" unitl long after the term "anti-abortion" had been in use.

Everybody's got media-savvy spin doctors and image consultants, that's why terminology matters so much these days.

I'd have liked to be an image consultant in the bad old days. "Well, Mr President, we want to reinforce that Prohibition is good. So call opponents of Prohibition 'baby-eating drunken sodomites', and you might want to draw attention to how fat and pasty they are. And spit at the crowd, that's always a good sound bite."

 

[hammegk]

I honestly think it's impossible to use "pro-abortion" without knowing it's emotionally laden, incorrect, and all-around invalid.

Just as others find pro-choice equally so. I take it 'baby murder' is little too strong for you.

 

[Luke T.]

Everybody's got media-savvy spin doctors and image consultants, that's why terminology matters so much these days.

I'd have liked to be an image consultant in the bad old days. "Well, Mr President, we want to reinforce that Prohibition is good. So call opponents of Prohibition 'baby-eating drunken sodomites', and you might want to draw attention to how fat and pasty they are. And spit at the crowd, that's always a good sound bite."

To me, the term "pro-choice" masks what we are really talking about. Abortion. It isn't about the right to choose what kind of burgers we eat, or shade of lipstick. It is about abortion. So "pro-abortion" is peeling off the facade.

The term "pro-life" carries the implication that the other side is all about death. So "anti-abortion" is peeling off the facade. I don't know why either side felt they had to mask the issue.

 

[Cleon]

Just as others find pro-choice equally so. I take it 'baby murder' is little too strong for you.

Pro-choice indicates a belief in choice whether to have an abortion or not; not a particularly accurate term, no, but much less bulky than, say, "pro-right-of-women-to-have-abortions-if-they-want-to."

"Pro-life" is completely invalid; if you're pro-death-penalty, like, say, Pat Robertson, you can't be seriously considered "pro-life."

"Anti-abortion" is pretty accurate to describe that movement. After all, you're against abortion, no?

Pro-abortion is just stupid. Several people in this thread have already demonstrated being pro-choice (or pro-right-of-women-etc) yet anti-abortion.

As for "baby murder," well, name one baby I've murdered. Just one.

 

[Anti_Hypeman]

So yes, it's fine to kill a few innocents by mistake

Nobody gets exectuted by mistake, they dont get sent to the gas chamber on accident. Executions are not the same things as surgery you cant be serious.

Would you give up the lives of your loved ones to kill a murderer or are you just offering up other peoples families for justice?

Life in prison isnt much better but you have a chance to make it right and people have been freed from death row. Would you kill one of your kids to give a murderer death instead of a life sentence? Dont be so fast to offer up the lives of others if you are not willing to make the same sacrifice.

 

[Cleon]

To me, the term "pro-choice" masks what we are really talking about. Abortion. It isn't about the right to choose what kind of burgers we eat, or shade of lipstick. It is about abortion. So "pro-abortion" is peeling off the facade.

"pro-Choice" may mask the issue, but it also indicates the choice involved, not necessarily pro- or anti-abortion.

"Pro-abortion" may "unmask" it, buit at the extreme loss of accuracy, and putting an emotional spin on it. "Pro-abortion" indicates being in favor of abortion; several people in this thread have already indicated they're being anti-abortion but pro-choice.

The term "pro-life" carries the implication that the other side is all about death. So "anti-abortion" is peeling off the facade. I don't know why either side felt they had to mask the issue.

"Pro-life" indicates being for life. Which is invalidated by people who are "pro-life" yet support capital punishment, war, and other life-taking activities.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I think that pro-choice, pro-abortion, pro-life, anti-choice...all the terms fit, not just the nice ones or the nasty ones. Legalized abortion is about choice, and it is about aborting a pregnancy. Standing against abortion is standing for the life of the embryo/fetus/baby/potential person/person/whatever, but it is also standing against the woman's right to choose. The words we use may betray our positions on the matter, but they don't change the matter itself.

Yeah, it's a very contentious issue. It deals with some very big issues, ones that make us uncomfortable no matter which side we're on. Terminating a pregnancy isn't a great thing. Telling someone what they can and can't do with their own body isn't a great thing, either. The hell of it is that neither position is ideal, there are significant drawbacks to both sides.

That's life. Sometimes the choice really is between the devil and the deep blue sea.

Which is why I think it would be more productive, after thirty years of wrangling about it and getting nowhere, if everyone concluded that neither side is going to win over the other and both should spend their resources on preventing the need for abortion, by promoting sex ed (real sex ed, not abstinence-only crap) and contraception, and ending this horrible atmosphere of invective and hatred that only serves to ensure that when hard choices have to be made, they're harder than necessary and everyone winds up miserable.

 

[toddjh]

To me, the term "pro-choice" masks what we are really talking about. Abortion. It isn't about the right to choose what kind of burgers we eat, or shade of lipstick. It is about abortion. So "pro-abortion" is peeling off the facade.

This is part of the problem with the debate. A "pro-choice" person would most likely argue that it is about choice: a woman's choice to make decisions regarding her own body. To many, the issue isn't about abortion in particular. Really. It's about what they perceive as religious busybodies trying to exert bodily control over their private decisions, and abortion is simply the most high-profile example. Likewise, most would say that "pro-abortion" is highly inaccurate, since I don't think anybody wants there to be more abortions in the world.

The term "pro-life" carries the implication that the other side is all about death. So "anti-abortion" is peeling off the facade. I don't know why either side felt they had to mask the issue.

It's a propaganda war. Perception is everything.

Jeremy

 

[Luke T.]

"Pro-abortion" may "unmask" it, buit at the extreme loss of accuracy, and putting an emotional spin on it. "Pro-abortion" indicates being in favor of abortion; several people in this thread have already indicated they're being anti-abortion but pro-choice.

Pro-choice about what? What is being chosen?

 

[toddjh]

Pro-choice about what? What is being chosen?

"Pro-choice-regarding-abortion" is a bit unwieldy. Isn't it okay to shorten it for convenience, as long as everyone understands the context?

ETA: If it were up to me, I'd prefer terms like "pro-legalization" and "pro-abolition" or somesuch. Something that indicates your position on the desired legality of abortion without implying anything about how you feel about it personally.

Jeremy

 

[Luke T.]

"Pro-choice-regarding-abortion" is a bit unwieldy. Isn't it okay to shorten it for convenience, as long as everyone understands the context?

Jeremy

Sure. Pro-choice-regarding-abortion.