If "pro-choicers" are really so "pro-choice" then why are they against the choice to be pro-life?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Holly3278
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Holly3278

Guest
This has been bothering me for some time. If “pro-choicers” are really so “pro-choice” then why are they so against the choice of being pro-life?
 
Answer to OP’s question:

They aren’t. They recognize that not everybody in the U.S. shares their moral viewpoint of being pro-life in all circumstances (or in some circumstances, depending on that viewpoint). However, they disapprove of abortion as a choice for themselves. (They do not consider abortion to be an acceptable choice for themselves in some/all circumstances.)

I know lots of people who are not interested in engaging in a repeal attempt of Roe v. Wade, but would not consider an abortion should they ever find themselves with an unwanted pregnancy. Many people do not want to open the precedent of having the gov’t decide who cannot have an abortion, given that in principles of law, the converse is often implied, or at least can be argued. (The gov’t can decide, therefore, that you must have an abortion.) They want the gov’t not to be the seat of morality, but the individual, in accordance with that individual’s church affiliation, personal values, etc.

Just explaining this. No flames, please.
 
I know you said no flames, however…

That argument doesn’t hold water when applied to much else. For instance, the government says you can’t “abort” fully grown adults. Does this mean the government will soon be mandating we do “abort” certain fully grown adults?
 
Elizabeth502 said:
Answer to OP’s question:

They aren’t. They recognize that not everybody in the U.S. shares their moral viewpoint of being pro-life in all circumstances (or in some circumstances, depending on that viewpoint). However, they disapprove of abortion as a choice for themselves. (They do not consider abortion to be an acceptable choice for themselves in some/all circumstances.)

I know lots of people who are not interested in engaging in a repeal attempt of Roe v. Wade, but would not consider an abortion should they ever find themselves with an unwanted pregnancy. Many people do not want to open the precedent of having the gov’t decide who cannot have an abortion, given that in principles of law, the converse is often implied, or at least can be argued. (The gov’t can decide, therefore, that you must have an abortion.) They want the gov’t not to be the seat of morality, but the individual, in accordance with that individual’s church affiliation, personal values, etc.

Just explaining this. No flames, please.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I never did understand the claims by pro-lifers that pro-choicers are pro-abortion. The fact that someone is pro-choice in no way means they are pro-abortion. It means they want a choice to be available.

And yes, please no flaming.
 
Thanks for asking and explaining this. I had thought about this for awhile.
And thanks for answering Rence and Elizabeth! It’s always vital to see both sides of the issue. It helps you understand your side better.

What does no flame mean?
 
Rence said:
Exactly. I never did understand the claims by pro-lifers that pro-choicers are pro-abortion. The fact that someone is pro-choice in no way means they are pro-abortion. It means they want a choice to be available.

And yes, please no flaming.
Click to expand...
Then what are pro-choicers doing for women who CHOOSE to keep their babies, but are in crisis pregnancies?
 
bpbasilphx said:
Then what are pro-choicers doing for women who CHOOSE to keep their babies, but are in crisis pregnancies?
Click to expand...
I would hope they are educating women on their options. I don’t know what crises you’re referring to, but for example: If a woman with a heart condition is told that her life is in danger because of the stress of the pregnancy, I would think a pro-choicer would help her research her options and work with her healthcare provider to prescribe such things as early delivery, medications, bed rest, or working resting times into the day, nutritional therapy. Perhaps some pro-choicers are teaching prenatal classes or women’s health classes, or working in places where they can reach women in crisis and help them research options on how to deal with a crisis pregnancy. what kind of crisis pregnancy are you talking about?
 
As someone who is pro choice I have nothing against your personal choice to be pro-life.

The problem is that most people who are pro-life go beyond their personal choice, and they want to make it so that it’s the only legal choice for everyone else.
 
Rence said:
I would hope they are educating women on their options. I don’t know what crises you’re referring to, but for example: If a woman with a heart condition is told that her life is in danger because of the stress of the pregnancy,*** I would think a pro-choicer would help her research her options and work with her healthcare provider to prescribe such things as early delivery, medications, bed rest, or working resting times into the day, nutritional therapy. ***Perhaps some pro-choicers are teaching prenatal classes or women’s health classes, or working in places where they can reach women in crisis and help them research options on how to deal with a crisis pregnancy. what kind of crisis pregnancy are you talking about?
Click to expand...
I would think in most cases that you would be wrong to think this.

'liz502 said it best; Pro-choicers simple aren’t. They are Pro-abortion. There really isn’t a choice when one has a baby; it is the default action, despite what the group “Rush” put into lyrics in the song “Free will”:

“If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”.

It’s perhaps a fine semantical line, but in general when people claim to be Pro-life, they’re pro-life all the time. When they’re Pro-choice, they’re Pro-Abortion most if not all of the time. Otherwise, why would they not be Pro-life?

Some “pro-lifers” claim that they aren’t always in favor of abortion. That, to yours truly, is a weak, cowardly, cop-out position, to put it in strong terms. What that position is saying is that only certain babies should be allowed to live, based on some arbitrary moving target of a criterion.
 
Rence said:
Exactly. I never did understand the claims by pro-lifers that pro-choicers are pro-abortion. The fact that someone is pro-choice in no way means they are pro-abortion. It means they want a choice to be available.

And yes, please no flaming.
Click to expand...
Being pro-choice by definition means not against abortion.
Catholics cannot be pro-choice.
 
Newbie2 said:
I would think in most cases that you would be wrong to think this.

**I am only in control of my own actions, and what I would do, is give alternatives and help research. I can’t speak for others. I do not control (nor do I want to control) other people’s actions. **

It’s perhaps a fine semantical line, but in general when people claim to be Pro-life, they’re pro-life all the time. When they’re Pro-choice, they’re Pro-Abortion most if not all of the time. Otherwise, why would they not be Pro-life?

**Because some pro-choicers really and truly believe that a woman has the right to her choice. It’s that simple.There really is no need to dig further, it really is that simple. **

Some “pro-lifers” claim that they aren’t always in favor of abortion. That, to yours truly, is a weak, cowardly, cop-out position, to put it in strong terms. What that position is saying is that only certain babies should be allowed to live, based on some arbitrary moving target of a criterion.

The above claim is simply a matter of opinion and I support your right to have your opinion. I support your right to live your life the way you choose, and support your right to make choices for yourself. However, no one has the right to make someone else’s choices and that’s ALL that matters to me. I own my choices. Just like the woman next door owns her choices. While I’m truly very sorry that my opinon and my rights are so upsetting to you, your opinions and rights certainly don’t upset me. I’m just grateful we each have those rights to exercise 🙂
Click to expand...
 
Pro-choicers are against involuntary sterilization. In the 1960s and 70s pro-choicers fought for the choice to terminate a pregnancy (abortion rights) and the choice to have a pregnancy (no forced sterilization). So pro-choice includes pro-life.
 
Holly3278 said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trishie
Good point, Holly!

**Thanks Trishie! **

Quote:
Originally Posted by bpbasilphx
Then what are pro-choicers doing for women who CHOOSE to keep their babies, but are in crisis pregnancies?

The answer? Absolutely nothing! !
Click to expand...
LOL, why did you bother asking then? You could have just posted the question and your answer in the same post 🤷
 
Rence said:
LOL, why did you bother asking then? You could have just posted the question and your answer in the same post 🤷
Click to expand...
Ummm, first of all, I find your post to be incredibly rude. Second of all, I did not ask the question. The quoted person asked that particular question. :rolleyes:
 
Rence said:
I am only in control of my own actions, and what I would do, is give alternatives and help research. I can’t speak for others. I do not control (nor do I want to control) other people’s actions.

Well, yes, of course. But when you speak about not wanting to control other people’s actions, does that include influencing other people’s actions? As well, when I say you’d be wrong to think that in general pro-choicers are likely to give the pro-life alternative, I mean that precisely; they are going to push abortion.

Because some pro-choicers really and truly believe that a woman has the right to her choice. It’s that simple.There really is no need to dig further, it really is that simple.

Right. They support abortion. Pro-lifers are against abortion. That’s what we’re all saying.

The above claim is simply a matter of opinion and I support your right to have your opinion. I support your right to live your life the way you choose, and support your right to make choices for yourself. However, no one has the right to make someone else’s choices and that’s ALL that matters to me. I own my choices. Just like the woman next door owns her choices. While I’m truly very sorry that my opinon and my rights are so upsetting to you, your opinions and rights certainly don’t upset me. I’m just grateful we each have those rights to exercise.

Do you see the irony there? “No one has the right tomake someone else’s choices, and that’s all that matters to (you)”. The mother is making a choice to terminate the baby’s life; you’re saying she has no right to make that choice. How could you possibly support a pro-choice position, then???

BTW, your position isn’t “upsetting” to me. It’s that the hypocrisy of the whole “pro-choice” idea. The mom has a choice, but the baby is denied a choice. Mom’s rights supercede the baby’s rights. Are you grateful that the baby has it’s rights denied?
Click to expand...
 
Rence said:
Exactly. I never did understand the claims by pro-lifers that pro-choicers are pro-abortion. The fact that someone is pro-choice in no way means they are pro-abortion. It means they want a choice to be available.

And yes, please no flaming.
Click to expand...
The pro abort crown very much wants to alter language to obfuscate the situation. Pro choice is pro abort. Imgaine “pro choice” on genocide? Rape? It really is about trying to alter the perception of reality.
 
Holly3278 said:
This has been bothering me for some time. If “pro-choicers” are really so “pro-choice” then why are they so against the choice of being pro-life?
Click to expand...
They call themselves “pro-choice” simply because it sells far better than “pro-murder.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top