If "pro-choicers" are really so "pro-choice" then why are they against the choice to be pro-life?
- Status
D
Doc_Keele
Guest
…which is a straw man argument
D
davidv
Guest
F
fix
Guest
Being offended at the truth would mean there is a deeper problem. How one forms their conscience is the heart of the matter.
F
fix
Guest
How does that make may position wrong on this topic?
Calling direct killing simply a choice says they do not matter. In fact, it is callous.
F
fix
Guest
Yes, it is at the heart. If one side can control language they can control the discussion. Words have meanings. Calling direct abortion simply a choice is an attempt to minimize what is really going on.
R
ryecroft
Guest
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?
Rence :
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
Elizabeth502
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.
Rence and Elizabeth, I have to completely agree with you!. I know of MANY, MANY people who are prochoice - many who are Catholic - even some Priests- Now Newbie2, I really believe that if Pro Choice people were really only pro abortion, then wouldn’t they be going to the OBGYN clinics, (much like the prolifers go to the abortion clinics) and stand outside with signs saying “don’t bring your fetus to term!” “Don’t Continue Your Pregnancies!” etc - but Pro Choicers aren’t - (personally, I am a pro choice Catholic (I used to consider myself pro life but have been told on here that I am Pro Choice)- because I don’t agree that if a woman is pregnant and the mother’s life is in IMMINENT danger that she shouldn’t have the CHOICE to save her own life - especially if the pregnancy isn’t to a viable term)
I truly wish that many didn’t use abortion as a form of birth control, but I am not suprized by the amount of Catholics that have abortions (they have 29% more abortions than protestant women do - in fact about 1/2 of all US women that become pregnant will have at least one abortion in their lifetime (Guttmacher institute is source)
But back to prochoicers - I wonder if some people aren’t getting prochoicers confused with planned parenthood people - yes, almost all pph people are prochoice but not all prochoice peoiple are PPH - I know that when in a clinic, I have heard about pph people even coercing women into abortions, but that doesn’t mean that all prochoice people would coerce a woman into having an abortion - I do know of plenty who would show them each “Choice” - keeping the pregnancy and the baby - adoption and yes, abortion. But not all prochoicers and I don’t even believe that a majority of them would “push” abortion on someone - many prochoicers are mothers themselves - there by proving that they really do believe there is a choice and not just the option of abortion.
God Bless
Annie Rye
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?
Rence :
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
Elizabeth502
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.
Rence and Elizabeth, I have to completely agree with you!. I know of MANY, MANY people who are prochoice - many who are Catholic - even some Priests- Now Newbie2, I really believe that if Pro Choice people were really only pro abortion, then wouldn’t they be going to the OBGYN clinics, (much like the prolifers go to the abortion clinics) and stand outside with signs saying “don’t bring your fetus to term!” “Don’t Continue Your Pregnancies!” etc - but Pro Choicers aren’t - (personally, I am a pro choice Catholic (I used to consider myself pro life but have been told on here that I am Pro Choice)- because I don’t agree that if a woman is pregnant and the mother’s life is in IMMINENT danger that she shouldn’t have the CHOICE to save her own life - especially if the pregnancy isn’t to a viable term)
I truly wish that many didn’t use abortion as a form of birth control, but I am not suprized by the amount of Catholics that have abortions (they have 29% more abortions than protestant women do - in fact about 1/2 of all US women that become pregnant will have at least one abortion in their lifetime (Guttmacher institute is source)
But back to prochoicers - I wonder if some people aren’t getting prochoicers confused with planned parenthood people - yes, almost all pph people are prochoice but not all prochoice peoiple are PPH - I know that when in a clinic, I have heard about pph people even coercing women into abortions, but that doesn’t mean that all prochoice people would coerce a woman into having an abortion - I do know of plenty who would show them each “Choice” - keeping the pregnancy and the baby - adoption and yes, abortion. But not all prochoicers and I don’t even believe that a majority of them would “push” abortion on someone - many prochoicers are mothers themselves - there by proving that they really do believe there is a choice and not just the option of abortion.
God Bless
Annie Rye
K
kage_ar
Guest
Guttmacher IS Planned Parenthood.
Their study means that of the women who went INTO a Planned Parenthood storefront and chose to not only get an abortion but complete the survey, 29% more of them ticked the box that said “Catholic” than the box that said “Protestant”.
Why on earth would you consider that a valid study?
B
BillP
Guest
Yet when one side tries to control the language through intellectual dishonesty then we have a problem.
Two examples that you’ve provided over the course of this thread
Abortion = murder. This isn’t true. The word “murder” had a specific legal definition and abortion doesn’t meet that definition. I understand that you like using emotionally charged words to give your arguments greater weight, but that doens’t change the definition of “murder”.
You’ve also asserted that the terms “fetus” and “baby” are interchangeable. Again, not true. A fetus isn’t a baby any more than an acorn is an oak tree. Embryo is even further from a baby. In reality these words all describe different things, thats why we have different words for them.
I understand that playing fast and lose with defintions makes a more compelling argument. Decrying abortion as the “murder of a baby” seems much more effective. But it isn’t honest.
As I said to another poster up-thread “you’re not ‘Humpty-dumpty’, words don’t mean what you say they mean.”
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
Post 190: Another excellent post, demonstrating why precision and common definitions encourage greater consensus than religion-specific definitions which, when insisted upon, halt dialogue, not to mention common progress.
If one’s aim is marginalizing, vilifying, and condemning, the accuser will just hurl destructive rhetoric. If your aim is a genuine, realistic, realizable goal, you’ll care about effective communication, which by definition is not divisive.
If one’s aim is marginalizing, vilifying, and condemning, the accuser will just hurl destructive rhetoric. If your aim is a genuine, realistic, realizable goal, you’ll care about effective communication, which by definition is not divisive.
D
Doc_Keele
Guest
I agree Ellizabeth - fantastic post:thumbsup:
R
ryecroft
Guest
Completely in agreement with Elizabeth and you Chris - it ceases to be a debate between the two and becomes a name and mudslinging match regarding which side can make the other sound the worst. That will never help change any minds!
God Bless
Rye
F
fix
Guest
Using language to redefine reality really is no help at all.
F
fix
Guest
Murder is intentionally killing an innocent person. This is common knowledge. Your attempt to redine murder as simply a legal concept is exactly the point I am making. That a law is unjust cannot change what is really happening. This is why I oppose the pro abort propaganda that claims we must say “choice”.
They all represent a human being. Is a teenager not a human because he/she is no longer a baby?
If you hold that killing an unborn baby is not murder then then the problem is not only language but something much deeper.
F
fix
Guest
IOW, simply claiming offense is enough.
F
fix
Guest
This is hyperbole. No one is halting dialogue. That some groups want to insist on false use of words does not mean everyone must agree.
Basically, telling the truth is vilifying?
F
fix
Guest
No, friend, you are.
- Status