Would the term "Babies Rights" be more effective than the term "Pro-Life" on placards?

[3DOCTORS]

• The prolife movement uses the term Prolife because we affirm the sacredness of life across the spectrum; unborn children, disabled children and adults, aging persons, all life.
  In states where euthenasia has been legalized, they are starting to deny payment of some kinds of treatment now, and even suggesting euthenasia as an alternative.

Precisely. Pro-life includes the unborn and much, much more.

That being said, I agree that financial assistance with childbirth expenses would be a good idea for helping women be more open to choosing to carry their babies to term. I’ve read accusatory pieces online by pro-choicers that point out that crisis pregnancy centers give out diapers and formula but aren’t able to help with the bigger costs of bearing a baby. Now this is possibly a generalization, but we should make sure they can’t lay such a charge at our feet. Maybe we should look into how to make more effort to help in the long term.

Overall, pro-lifers frequently get accused of only caring for the baby, not the mother. We should be loving and caring for both. And I think most pro-life people do. Therefore, I don’t recommend slogans that only emphasize the baby. It might be well meaning in one sense yet send an incomplete message in another sense, if you see what I mean.

 

[M-Dent]

They are not wrong though. We see nasty comments here about some groups of people from time to time

One can cherry pick in any group and make all sorts of unfounded conclusions.

 

[M-Dent]

Btw, I have worked in environments where many of my co-workers have been highly educated and happened to be agnostic or atheist. If/when the topic of abortion came up - I objected due to a human life being snuffed out with no regard to the dignity of their life. It never touch on religion; or me being Catholic. It didn’t need to. I argued based on human reason. I rarely left lunch tables without co-workers feeling uneasy.

 

[Lea101]

Precisely. Pro-life includes the unborn and much, much more.

That being said, I agree that financial assistance with childbirth expenses would be a good idea for helping women be more open to choosing to carry their babies to term. I’ve read accusatory pieces online by pro-choicers that point out that crisis pregnancy centers give out diapers and formula but aren’t able to help with the bigger costs of bearing a baby. Now this is possibly a generalization, but we should make sure they can’t lay such a charge at our feet. Maybe we should look into how to make more effort to help in the long term.

Overall, pro-lifers frequently get accused of only caring for the baby, not the mother. We should be loving and caring for both. And I think most pro-life people do. Therefore, I don’t recommend slogans that only emphasize the baby. It might be well meaning in one sense yet send an incomplete message in another sense, if you see what I mean.

Yup!

 

[M-Dent]

Today, we saw anti-Trump protesters going around holding placards saying “Womens Rights”. The term “Womens Rights” on the surface sounds like a good thing. I mean, who wouldn’t want to give rights to women? However, as we know, the term “Women Rights” in large part, refers to the right for a woman to choose to have an abortion. They use the term “Womens Rights” in an attempt to give some kind of legitimacy to abortion as if it was a good thing

I’ve tried to reason with some that have used the term Women’s Rights as justification for killing a unique human life. The trend changed to using the term Reproductive Rights. This gave an air of a bunch of cells in a reproductive system that failed to meet the standard as human being {avoiding the Women’s rights vs the perceived Baby’s rights}.

Human reasoning is being bastardized. Keep the noble argument simple.

 

[randomuser]

Anyway, pro lifers are not taken seriously because the majority of them are a joke. No offense. But we are already being made fun of because some of us are against welfare, affordable healthcare, whatever that helps the underprivileged people. Some of us are homophobic or racist. We give the impression that we care about the baby until it’s born. So why should people believe when we tell them that we are pro life?

(If you don’t believe me for whatever reason, just scroll through social media)

We should be focusing more on these little issues, in my opinion.

And the obvious personhood of the unborn baby vis a vis the U.S. tax code and possibly amending the Constitution. Case in point: Is it time to start considering tax exemption for the unborn? If the unborn baby is truly a life deserving of legal protection, then the obvious legal solution would be to codify the sanctity of life into the Constitution and the tax code and allow unborn babies to be claimed as dependents. I wish I knew why this was such a non-starter and nobody wants to consider the idea.

 

[JanetF]

Today, we saw anti-Trump protesters going around holding placards saying “Womens Rights”. The term “Womens Rights” on the surface sounds like a good thing. I mean, who wouldn’t want to give rights to women? However, as we know, the term “Women Rights” in large part, refers to the right for a woman to choose to have an abortion. They use the term “Womens Rights” in an attempt to give some kind of legitimacy to abortion as if it was a good thing.

So why don’t pro-life marchers use the term “Babies Rights” more? Afterall, everyone should be in favor of babies rights? I think if the term “Babies Rights” was used more, it would help make those in favor of abortion less comfortable in their position as their position effectively means they are against something which sounds good i.e. Babies Rights. No one would want to admit that they were against “Babies Rights”.

Do you think it would be more effective to use the phrase “Babies Rights” instead of “Pro-Life” on placards?

Because the pro-life movement is much much more than just about pre-born babies. Think about euthanasia, capital punishment, end of life issues, etc.

 

[Mulligan2]

The term “Babies Rights” will never catch on. For the overwhelming majority of people, when they hear the word “baby” they think of someone who has been born. And for many people who oppose reproductive freedom, once a baby is born their interest ends. Second, if babies had rights, one of those rights would surely be genital integrity, and none of them would be welcomed into the world by having their genitals forcibly cut or altered in any way.

 

[Culurecatholic]

The moment a pro-lifer says abortion is wrong because a god doesn’t want it is the moment that pro-lifer lost the argument. That’s why anti-LGBT people lost the marriage-equality argument. Not that I’m upset about that; being gay, I’m glad LGBT people now have the full equal protection of the law guaranteed by the 14th Amendment and there’s nothing homophobes can do about it. They will bake that cake, arrange those flowers and rent that venue; doesn’t matter what their god says. The Constitution has overruled it. But it shows that saying, especially when it comes to law in our secular America, what a god says means beans, both to the law and the people. Want to convince people to bring down abortion, just like homophobia was brought down? Provide secular, logical arguments for it. We have them; use them. But the mainstream pro-life movement won’t. It’s all god-this stuff. You lost on the evil of homophobia. Want to continue losing on on the evil of abortion?