Although I'm pro-choice, one of my pet peeves is when fellow supporters of abortion rights try to pretend that being labelled "pro-abortion" is somehow incorrect. If you describe yourself as pro-choice you are in favor of keeping abortion procedures legal and available. It doesn't mean you love abortions or want to see more of them, but it certainly does mean you are "pro-abortion," as opposed to anti-abortion. It should be obvious, but when you support the right of a woman to choose, the primary thing you support is her right to choose an abortion. That makes you and I pro-abortion. If you pretend otherwise that makes you logically-challenged.
Having said that, why do I use the term pro-choice instead of pro-abortion? I use it for two reasons. First, it's the widely accepted and used term for those supporting abortion rights. Another of my pet peeves is when people refuse to use commonly-accepted terms and instead substitute some sort of jargon preferred by their particular group. (I'll get back to that point shortly.) Second, pro-choice as a term accurately reflects the primary outlook of those supporting abortion rights. Most of us support abortion because we focus on a woman's right to control her own body. In other words, being pro-choice emphasizes that a woman should have the final choice in whether or not she gives birth.
On a related note, I use the term "pro-life" for exactly the same reasons that I employ pro-choice. It's the commonly-accepted and widely-used term for anti-abortion people, and it accurately conveys their emphasis, which is to protect the life of the unborn baby above all other consideration -- such as the wishes & rights of the mother. It is common in left-wing and feminist writings to shun the term pro-life and substitute "anti-choice." I find this incredibly silly. Whenever I see people using this substitution it automatically makes me take them much less seriously.
I'm pro-autonomy. Women have the right to control who is in their body, just like you have the right to shoot a home invader.
ReplyDeleteWho is pro-abortion? Oh right, the Chinese government...
Also, most right-wing "pro-life" people are just anti-abortion. They don't oppose wars or capital punishment usually, they just hate abortion.
"Who is pro-abortion? Oh right, the Chinese government..."
ReplyDeleteThe Chinese government is for forced abortions which is a whole other issue.
"Also, most right-wing "pro-life" people are just anti-abortion. They don't oppose wars or capital punishment"
Wars and captial punishment have nothing to do with abortion and attempts to conflate them usually indicate a major lack of logical reasoning.
Right... because people in other countries aren't actually living people, and neither are criminals. They're not alive... so therefore, it's okay to kill them and claim you are pro-life.
ReplyDeleteYou're a fucking moron, sir.
:Right... because people in other countries aren't actually living people, and neither are criminals. They're not alive... so therefore, it's okay to kill them and claim you are pro-life.
ReplyDeleteYou're a fucking moron, sir.:"
That's pretty funny coming from someone whose inability to form a rational argument has been demonstrated on multiple occasions. Apparently you are too simple-minded to recognize that killing enemies or convicted murderers differs tremendously from killing innocent victims who have done no harm. I know that's just too complicated to grasp.
When a mosquito bites you and you swat it, is that the equivalent to murdering another human being? After all, by your level of reasoning they are both alive, therefore there is some sort of equivalence.
Pro-life means something specific with regard to abortion, as does pro-choice. I know you aren't too proficient at thinking, but I seriously doubt you can grasp that point. Stupidity or intellectual dishonesty, which is it?
Pro-choice and pro-abortion are not the same thing. Pro abortion implies that you are supporting the act of abortion itself, which is probably not the case. It is entirely possible to believe that a woman has a right to an abortion while wishing she not exercise that right.
ReplyDelete"Pro-choice and pro-abortion are not the same thing"
ReplyDeleteObviously I disagree. Pro-choice is indeed support for abortion. There is no one arguing that women don't have a right to have a baby. They only choice that needs supporting is the choice not to have a baby, which means supporting abortion.
"It is entirely possible to believe that a woman has a right to an abortion while wishing she not exercise that right. "
That's true. But it is also true that in order to support a right to an abortion you have to support abortion as a procedure being legal and available which makes you pro-abortion, as opposed to being anti-abortion and wanting it banned.
JUDGMENT DAY
ReplyDeletebadscience.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=21080
"But it is also true that in order to support a right to an abortion you have to support abortion as a procedure being legal and available which makes you pro-abortion"
ReplyDeleteNo, pro-abortion means you actively support the procedure of abortion, and would probably involve mailing pregnant people coat-hangers or something.
Just because you feel that a someone has a right does not mean that they support the free exercise of that right. For example, I support the right of free speech. I do not support the west-borough baptist church, and would gladly take action against them/work to minimize their impact. In no way can I be said to support the church.
In the same way, I can acknowledge the right to an abortion while viewing the procedure as harmful and wanting as few abortions as possible performed. Because I do not support abortion, I cannot be considered pro-abortion, even though I am pro-choice.
"No, pro-abortion means you actively support the procedure of abortion"
ReplyDeleteYes, and if you are pro-choice you do in fact actively support the procedure of abortion. There's no way I can be pro-choice without also supporting the existence of abortion as a legal medical procedure.
"and would probably involve mailing pregnant people coat-hangers or something. "
No, that's a non-sequitur. You are reading way too much into the term pro-abortion.
"Just because you feel that a someone has a right does not mean that they support the free exercise of that right."
That makes no sense. If you don't support the exercise of rights then your support for those rights is non-existent.
"I support the right of free speech. I do not support the west-borough baptist church, and would gladly take action against them/work to minimize their impact. In no way can I be said to support the church. "
That's true, but also irrelevant. Since when does being "pro-" anything mean that you have to support every single instance of that thing regardless of the particular circumstances?
"In the same way, I can acknowledge the right to an abortion while viewing the procedure as harmful and wanting as few abortions as possible performed. "
Yes, I agree that is a reasonable position.
"Because I do not support abortion, I cannot be considered pro-abortion, even though I am pro-choice."
Not liking the procedure, or wanting to see it used as little as possible doesn't mean you don't support abortion. If you want it legal and available -- which I assume you do since you say you are pro-choice -- you do support abortion.
I support gun rights. I don't support people murdering people with guns or using them to commit crimes. I support the use of guns to shoot people only under certain defined circumstance such as self-defense in a life-threatening situation. I don't think people should be forced to have guns, but that they should have a choice to employ them for self-defense. I'm pro-choice on guns. Am I pro-gun or anti-gun? Would it make any sense for me to say that I support gun rights but not guns?
Was this whole discussion really about the semantics?
ReplyDeleteOf course nobody enjoys abortion, just as nobody enjoys killing an intruder in self-defense. And if someone does enjoy former or latter, then in my opinion it is not at all a matter of semantics, but rather I would be concerned for a mental health of such a person.
At last I see a radical difference between an intruder and a baby.... for intruder was never invited, but a baby was in 99% a result of mothers deliberate action. See: http://wp.me/p1FzKo-3s and let us know what you think.