Is "pro-birth" offensive?

[columbus]

I stated clearly why I don't agree with the usage of the term "pro-abortion".

What I see there is a batch of assertions about what other people really mean, even when you are contradicting what they say.
Tom

 

[Shadow Wolf]

"I checked with NBC, CBS, CNN, the Associated Press, the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Philadelphia Inquirer and not one of them uses the terms "pro-choice" or "pro-life."

That's because that is what the AP Style Guide states; in journalism that book is essentially the Bible when it comes to what terms to use, how to spell them, what to hyphenate, what to abbreviate, and many other things.

 

[dust1n]

:Sigh:

 

[Monk Of Reason]

What I see there is a batch of assertions about what other people really mean, even when you are contradicting what they say.
Tom

I think what she means is that the term "Pro-Abortion" insinuates something other than what others mean. I know that the people in this thread don't bathe in infant blood (most of the time). Calling it "pro-abortion" rather than "pro-choice" creates a powerful image that can sway the minds of people. So if you say I am "pro choice" that brings a pleasant image to mind. It brings up the image of freedom and the protection of those freedoms. The term "pro-abortion" brings to mind people murdering babies with a spork as they shed a gleeful tear that streams down the side of their sadistic twisted smile.

The above is exaggerated for effect. I too am against calling it "pro-abortion". I am also against calling it "anti-life". I am even against "pro-life". I prefer the terms "pro-choice" and "anti-choice" or "anti-abortion".

 

[columbus]

I too am against calling it "pro-abortion". I am also against calling it "anti-life". I am even against "pro-life". I prefer the terms "pro-choice" and "anti-choice" or "anti-abortion".

Of course I do understand all of this.

I don't have a problem with any of the terms themselves so much as the misuse of the terms. This happens a lot.
Using pithy and imprecise terms to label views about such a complex issue makes it easy to misrepresent the views. Both ones own and those of others.

For example, I have a huge problem with referring to "no abortion ever, if prayer doesn't save the mother then her agonizing death is a part of God's Mysterious Plan" as pro life. It is not in my book.
I also have a problem with the term pro choice when it means" the right of one parent to unchoose the predictable outcome of a previous string of choices ". I am all about people exercising their freedom to choose before they involve others.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

Then you misudnerstand the meaning. I feel they are speaking poorly. Are they for having abortions for the sake of having abortions? Do the celebrate and relish abortions? Or are they hard choices made by women for the overall good of their lives? No one "wants" to have to have an abortion. No one gets pregnant just to get an abortion and I would imagine very few if any women have unprotected sex because they feel "well i can just get an abortion".

"Pro-abortion" doesn't mean we want abortions whenever possible.
It simply means we're pro-the-right-to-abortion.

One should not take idioms & labels too literally.
Now it's time for some absurdities......
"Firemen" set fires.
"Cowboys" are young male cows.
"Disc jockeys" ride around on discs.
"Pro gay marriage" means I want everyone in a same sex marriage.

 

[Sundance]

I think "pro-birth," like "pro-life," is a little too broad to describe those opposed to the legalization of abortion. At the crux of the legalization issue is the ability to choose, and in as much as such people are against the pro-choice position, as inflammatory as it may be, I think "anti-choice" is the best expression. Such people honestly don't want any female to have the choice to have an abortion or not. They are truly anti-choice.


.

I will challenge you on this, dear jojom, and offer this rebuttal: you seem to imply that an individual who is anti-abortion is automatically “anti-choice”. Let me ask you this: doesn't a woman already have and make the choice to have an abortion? Yes. So, what does this particular debate actually come down to? To put it plainly, how one feels about the particular options (either having the child or having an abortion), just as with any choice in life. The choice, by default, is the woman's. Some people favour one course of action over another, which is why there are the difference sides.

 

[jojom]

I will challenge you on this, dear jojom, and offer this rebuttal: you seem to imply that an individual who is anti-abortion is automatically “anti-choice”.

Only where both denote opposition to a woman's right to choose to have an abortion or not. Want to affix some other meaning to the either term go right ahead, but it doesn't interest me.

Let me ask you this: doesn't a woman already have and make the choice to have an abortion? Yes. So, what does this particular debate actually come down to?

It comes down to the best way to designate (label) the two positions. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Deathbydefault]

I am pro abortion in the sense that it is a woman's choice as to whether or not she gives birth.
That is all.

 

[psychoslice]

I'm all for abortion if done right and as soon as possible, my mum had two, if its good enough for her its good enough for me.

 

[Sundance]

Only where both denote opposition to a woman's right to choose to have an abortion or not. Want to affix some other meaning to the either term go right ahead, but it doesn't interest me.

That's the thing, though, only one truly does. The other, reflects a general distaste for it. There is a difference in the implication, you know.

It comes down to the best way to designate (label) the two positions. Nothing more, nothing less.

Indeed, mein Freund, indeed. Which is why I believe that grest care must be exercised in correctly defining our terms.

 

[jojom]

That's the thing, though, only one truly does. The other, reflects a general distaste for it. There is a difference in the implication, you know.

And which one reflects a general distaste for it, and why?

Indeed, mein Freund, indeed. Which is why I believe that grest care must be exercised in correctly defining our terms.

Only to the extent one is dealing with a pedant, or assembling a scholarly text of some kind. Otherwise, any expression that gets the accepted notion across is good enough. The discussion in the thread here certainly isn't meant to be carved in stone or go any further than RF; it's just a bit of fun trying to pin down the best labels. No big deal.


.

 

[Bunyip]

I think 'pro-totalitarianism' would work to describe those who wish for state control of human reproduction.
Anti-choice is a little wishy washy, anti freedom, anti-liberationist ect would work.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Then you misudnerstand the meaning. I feel they are speaking poorly. Are they for having abortions for the sake of having abortions? Do the celebrate and relish abortions? Or are they hard choices made by women for the overall good of their lives? No one "wants" to have to have an abortion. No one gets pregnant just to get an abortion and I would imagine very few if any women have unprotected sex because they feel "well i can just get an abortion".

Nobody wants to get cancer just so they can get chemotherapy, but I bet you wouldn't bat an eye at someone saying that they were "pro-chemo".

 

[Sundance]

And which one reflects a general distaste for it, and why?

The very wording ‘anti-abortion’ reflects that distaste. Like ‘anti-war’, it is a personal belief as informed by an individual's conscience. People of good faith are on both sides of every issue because of that. Their consciences lead them to different conclusions about this issue.

Only to the extent one is dealing with a pedant, or assembling a scholarly text of some kind. Otherwise, any expression that gets the accepted notion across is good enough. The discussion in the thread here certainly isn't meant to be carved in stone or go any further than RF; it's just a bit of fun trying to pin down the best labels. No big deal..

Indeed, it ain't no tiff. Just a bit of amicable debate.

 

[jojom]

The very wording ‘anti-abortion’ reflects that distaste. Like ‘anti-war’, it is a personal belief as informed by an individual's conscience.

Like "anti-choice."


.

 

[Quetzal]

If we think about it, it probably isn't accurate to characterize any person's position on a subject with a single (possibly hyphenated) word. It not only oversimplifies, but can create polarization where there is actually a great deal of common ground or alternative options.

While I agree over simplification is a problem best to avoid, can you clarify something for me? What kind of common ground and alternatives did you have in mind?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Only to the extent one is dealing with a pedant, or assembling a scholarly text of some kind. Otherwise, any expression that gets the accepted notion across is good enough.
.

^ This.

 

[Quintessence]

While I agree over simplification is a problem best to avoid, can you clarify something for me? What kind of common ground and alternatives did you have in mind?

There are plenty of examples readily witnessed in the dialogue on the topic of abortion. There are people who are against abortion on principle and would never have one themselves, but are not interested in making any laws banishing it. There are people who only find them okay if both people contributing to its DNA agree to the decision - that both the man and the woman have to agree. There are people who are generally against abortion but are willing to make exceptions for certain types of cases. There are people who are willing to allow them within a certain time frame. And the underlying belief structures which led to these stances vary across the board. In at least some cases, there is a common respect for human life and human dignity. If nothing else, I would say that all parties involved are doing what they feel is the right thing, even if they disagree about what that is.

 

[Quetzal]

There are plenty of examples readily witnessed in the dialogue on the topic of abortion. There are people who are against abortion on principle and would never have one themselves, but are not interested in making any laws banishing it. There are people who only find them okay if both people contributing to its DNA agree to the decision - that both the man and the woman have to agree. There are people who are generally against abortion but are willing to make exceptions for certain types of cases. There are people who are willing to allow them within a certain time frame. And the underlying belief structures which led to these stances vary across the board. In at least some cases, there is a common respect for human life and human dignity. If nothing else, I would say that all parties involved are doing what they feel is the right thing, even if they disagree about what that is.

Great post, thank you.