abortion terminology

Post Reply New Topic

I was watching CNN today, and this guy they were interviewing pissed me off; he called me PRO-ABORTION! He called himself PRO-LIFE. I am sick of conservatives who mis-label people to advance their arguments.

1. I AM NOT PRO-ABORTION! I should sue anyone who slanders me with such an accusation. I am PRO-ABORTION-RIGHTS, which isn't the same thing at all! It means that I support a woman's right to choose whether to have a child or not. I think abortion is bad, and we should ALL work to make abortion UNNECESSARY!

2. You do not have a monopoly on being PRO-LIFE... I AM PRO LIFE! I oppose abortion, just as you do. I also oppose the death penalty and war (do you?... I may be more Pro-Life than you are!)

I agree with you, but it is better than being called pro-death.

a few other examples, as used by the Vatican:

unborn children = foetuses
life = potential of life
civilisation of death = rationality
civilisation of life = irrationality
murder = not letting the potential of life to develop

I think mis-labelling someone pro-abortion is exactly the same as calling him pro-death.

No one is 'pro-abortion'. Pro-abortion would advocate that every fetus be aborted. The pro-choice means that children should be wanted. Geez there are many parents that are pro-choice themselves.

I prefer the terms pro-death and anti-choice.

Conservatives in general tend to be pretty irrational - but anti-abortion nitwits are especially so. In a way I could be considered "pro-abortion" in that I'd rather see more of it than see the population continue to explode out of control and people keep having kids they can't take care of.

To me abortion is murder and it should be counted as so.

I mean really have some compassion for the unborn they are humans too.

Last edited by Shadowgirl on 17 May 2009, 3:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I think the term pro-death is just being an ass, but I can see how someone apposed to all abortion might rationaize the term pro-abortion. Ahh...this reminds me of the last abortion thread where Henriksson suggested pro-death and I suggested anti-compassion.

The situation is seldom so black and white.

Have some compassion for the mother, she is a human too.

Hmm.... I wasn't there. I usually avoid such threads.

In any case, the conservative case about abortion really is pretty simple: if you are in favor of abortion, then you literally are in favor of murder. This is why this issue sets them all up in arms.

Part of this is based upon their interpretation of the law in Exodus:

Exodus 21:22-24 "When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman's husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. (23) But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, (24) eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,

Another part of it is their interpretation of abortion in more neutral moral terms, as noted with the acronym SLED(Size, Level of Development, Environment, Dependency):

1. Size or Physical Appearance – Do humans lose value when they don’t look right? Does size equal value? Men are generally larger than women. Does that mean men are more human than women? Shaquille O’Neil is larger than Hillary Clinton. Does that mean Hillary Clinton is less human than Shaq? The term used to describe the destruction of groups of people based on their physical appearance is ethnic cleansing or genocide. But human value transcends physical appearance. Therefore, “not looking right” cannot disqualify a human being from being valuable.

2. Level of Development – Is a person’s value defined by his abilities, by what he can or can’t do? Do we forfeit our rights as human persons because we don’t have the capabilities others have? Do stronger, more capable, more intelligent people have more rights than others? Do human beings become disposable simply because at their level of development they are helpless, defenseless, and dependent? Human value transcends abilities or the lack of abilities. Therefore, missing abilities cannot disqualify human value.

3. Environment – Do humans forfeit their worth when they change locations? Baby Rachel was born prematurely at 24 weeks. She weighed only 1 lb. 9 oz., but dropped to just under 1 lb. soon after. She was so small she could rest in the palm of her daddy’s hand. She was a tiny, living, person. Heroic measures were taken to save her life. If a doctor had killed Rachel we would have recoiled in horror. However, if this same little girl was inches away from the outside world, resting inside her mother’s womb, she could be legally killed by abortion. Clearly, one’s environment can’t be the deciding factor. Changing locations is morally trivial. Environment has no bearing on who we are.

4. Degree of Dependency – Is human value determined by our degree of dependency on others? The unborn’s dependency on his mother for sustenance is irrelevant to the baby’s value. No baby is “viable” if degree of dependency matters. All babies need their mothers for feeding whether via blood (an umbilical cord), breast, or bottle. Human beings may be dependent on others for their survival, but they aren’t dependent on others for their value. All physically dependent people are at risk if degree of dependency determines their value – those dependent on kidney machines, pacemakers, and insulin would have to be declared non-persons. Dependency does not determine worth.

So, for them to be angry, riled up, etc, about abortion does make some sense. Most people don't consider murder a point of reasonable disagreement.

So true. I was reading about Obama's speech at Notre Dame Universtiy, he said that there needs to be civility in the abortion debate. I think the pro-life movement should really heed his words. There is nothing civil about killing doctors, blowing up clinics, and they have some of the most loudest protest demonstrations that I have ever seen. The pro-choice movement only ask that women be allow to decide for themselves, and they do not harm anyone to get their message across, at least I have not heard of anyone.

The only reason why I see some people for being pro-life is for religious reasons. The christians are also against stem-cell research. Their beliefs on these issues don't count because religion and state are seperate, and thank goodness that it is because if religion was law like the way they want it to be, we'd turn into the middle-east.

Religious beliefs do not apply to everyone, and the pro-lifers need to understand that.... I am sure that if one of them had a child that was cured of juvenile diabetes because of stem-cell research... they would not complain.



Also the christans that are against stem-cell research say that is wastes human life.... yet they fail to reconize that many fertalized eggs are wasted when they come out during a period... what do they want me to do? Say a prayer over my maxi pad?

Interestingly, my post above yours addresses a number of your concerns.

To the Christians, this is not a matter of civil dispute, such as tax laws or anything like that, but rather a matter of murder. By their moral standards, comparing abortion to the holocaust is not only legitimate, but actually, the holocaust might even be a fair standard better in some ways, as less people were killed.

In addition, Christians do address their beliefs on person with some additional philosophical reasoning. I did provide SLED and the reasoning behind it. (It is a cut&paste btw, just to let people know that I am not being original about SLED) Christians really do believe that this issue is one of murder, and they do not really see this as a matter of compromise or debate. I mean, the Catholic church has a standing order to excommunicate anyone who receives an abortion and to excommunicate any politician that makes it any bit easier to get an abortion.

I think we where typing at the same time because your previous post wasn't there while I was making my response.

Don't even deny it. I am just bringing this up. I thought that this might be a possibility though, so I hope I wasn't rude sounding when I did that.

Deny what???



Na, I am at work right now, and my post took close close to 15 min to type because I am contantly doing other things.