Is "pro-choice" a misleading term?

[Fahran]

"Pro-free" would, as I pointed out earlier, upset pro-lifers even more. As, if "pro-choice" were to become "pro-free" (and "pro-free" would be a silly phrase, and not only because it is painfully ungrammatical) "pro-life" would -- by implication -- be "pro-slavery".

That's why both the current phrases make so much more sense.

I largely agree with you on this point.

[Katganistan]

In the context of abortion Pro life is exactly that, protecting the life that began upon conception. In this same context pro-choice is representative of a person's choice to extinguish that life. Sure it is a choice, but the greater emphasis is on extinguishing that life. That's my view on this. I've said before that pro-life people have problems with humans after they're born and there's hypocrisy in it, but pro-choice people cannot acknowledge there's a certain wantonness practiced by some of their members too. Double standards.

So...

Pro-life is representative of their first priority: the foetus' life.
Pro-choice is representative of their first priority: the woman's choice.

Both names apply only in relation to abortion: nothing to do with behaviour outside of that context (nothing prior to conception, after birth, etc).

Now, considering that, why do either of those names need to be changed?

Simple answer: neither needs to be changed.

[Katganistan]

Yea yea yea, keep insisting.

And the comment contributes precisely... what to the discussion?

Nothing of value.
Honestly, the reasoning is incomprehensible unless the purpose of it is to simply waste time.

[Quantipapa]

And the comment contributes precisely... what to the discussion?

Nothing of value.
Honestly, the reasoning is incomprehensible unless the purpose of it is to simply waste time.

Geez

[The Archregimancy]

Nothing of value.
Honestly, the reasoning is incomprehensible unless the purpose of it is to simply waste time.

Geez

Quantipapa, your last few posts have been unconstructive to the point that they're veering towards spam.

Please try and engage in discussion rather than just post these one-word or short one-sentence posts that do nothing to contribute to discussion.

If this continues, I may need to consider whether it's still worth keeping this thread open.

[Big Jim P]

So...

Pro-life is representative of their first priority: the foetus' life.
Pro-choice is representative of their first priority: the woman's choice.

Both names apply only in relation to abortion: nothing to do with behaviour outside of that context (nothing prior to conception, after birth, etc).

Now, considering that, why do either of those names need to be changed?

Simple answer: neither needs to be changed.

Agreed, although neither term precisely covers my position/opinion on the subject of abortion. I consider abortion to be wrong on moral grounds (it does after all terminally harm an innocent). I also fully support a womans right to chose one moral grounds. Imposing my opinion on women would be just as if not more morally wrong.

As an aside, one of the many reasons I am glad I am a man is the fact that I will never have to face this choice. I may envy some aspects of womanhood, but not this one.

[Godular]

Simple answer: neither needs to be changed.

Agreed, although neither term precisely covers my position/opinion on the subject of abortion. I consider abortion to be wrong on moral grounds (it does after all terminally harm an innocent). I also fully support a womans right to chose one moral grounds. Imposing my opinion on women would be just as if not more morally wrong.

As an aside, one of the many reasons I am glad I am a man is the fact that I will never have to face this choice. I may envy some aspects of womanhood, but not this one.

You’d be extremely hard-pressed to find a pro-choicer who ‘likes’ abortion, so your position is pretty much right on target.

[Quantipapa]

It's not about whether a pro-choice person likes abortion or not. It's about what that choice entails - eliminating a life. The same people who support better not be the same ones who oppose capital punishment.

[The New California Republic]

It's not about whether a pro-choice person likes abortion or not. It's about what that choice entails - eliminating a life.

I kill wasps with reckless abandon. That is eliminating a life/lives too.

The same people who support better not be the same ones who oppose capital punishment.

And why not?

[The Free Joy State]

It's not about whether a pro-choice person likes abortion or not. It's about what that choice entails - eliminating a life. The same people who support better not be the same ones who oppose capital punishment.

An insentiate foetus is different to a sensate, born human being.

A person being sentenced to capital punishment does not dwell in the body of the judge. A person on death row does not use the blood and organs of the judge.

The foetus is in the woman's body. It uses her blood and organs. It puts her life at risk (maternity causes 700 deaths in the USA every year, and still the biggest cause of death in women of childbearing age worldwide).

There is no comparison between the two.

[Estanglia]

It's not about whether a pro-choice person likes abortion or not. It's about what that choice entails - eliminating a life.

As we have repeatedly stated, we don't like the death of the fetus. The fact that a (insensate) life has been eliminated is regrettable and something we wish to prevent by eliminating or reducing the factors causing somebody to have an abortion. But we don't see that insensate life (that is entirely dependent on the mother btw) as something that trumps the mother's rights to control her body.

The same people who support better not be the same ones who oppose capital punishment.

The insensate fetus is not the same as a conscious person.

[Godular]

It's not about whether a pro-choice person likes abortion or not. It's about what that choice entails - eliminating a life.

So does self-defense, but many of those who champion the purported rights of the fetus do not tend to have an issue with stand-your-ground.

The same people who support better not be the same ones who oppose capital punishment.

I do, and there is no logical inconsistency in so doing.

[Big Jim P]

Agreed, although neither term precisely covers my position/opinion on the subject of abortion. I consider abortion to be wrong on moral grounds (it does after all terminally harm an innocent). I also fully support a womans right to chose one moral grounds. Imposing my opinion on women would be just as if not more morally wrong.

As an aside, one of the many reasons I am glad I am a man is the fact that I will never have to face this choice. I may envy some aspects of womanhood, but not this one.

You’d be extremely hard-pressed to find a pro-choicer who ‘likes’ abortion, so your position is pretty much right on target.

Maybe a little more extreme though. I do consider a fetus to be an innocent human being. I have touched the hand a a premie, born at a legally abortable stage. Even in his incubator, with all the equipment and so much going against him, he still grabbed my finger. Up until then, I didn't have much of an opinion on the subject.

[Quantipapa]

You’d be extremely hard-pressed to find a pro-choicer who ‘likes’ abortion, so your position is pretty much right on target.

Maybe a little more extreme though. I do consider a fetus to be an innocent human being. I have touched the hand a a premie, born at a legally abortable stage. Even in his incubator, with all the equipment and so much going against him, he still grabbed my finger. Up until then, I didn't have much of an opinion on the subject.

Thank you.

[The New California Republic]

Maybe a little more extreme though. I do consider a fetus to be an innocent human being. I have touched the hand a a premie, born at a legally abortable stage. Even in his incubator, with all the equipment and so much going against him, he still grabbed my finger. Up until then, I didn't have much of an opinion on the subject.

Thank you.

...for what?? Jim wasn't responding to you...

[Godular]

You’d be extremely hard-pressed to find a pro-choicer who ‘likes’ abortion, so your position is pretty much right on target.

Maybe a little more extreme though. I do consider a fetus to be an innocent human being. I have touched the hand a a premie, born at a legally abortable stage. Even in his incubator, with all the equipment and so much going against him, he still grabbed my finger. Up until then, I didn't have much of an opinion on the subject.

How many weeks? You say legally abortable but depending on circumstances that could still be well past viability.

Also, grabbing is a rather important reflex for infant primates, helps them cling to mommyfur. I’m not trying to dehumanize your experience, but emotional responses can add meaning where none exists. Recall Terry Schiavo’s parents claiming she could see and respond to a balloon, and the autopsy pointed out she was completely blind.

[Big Jim P]

Maybe a little more extreme though. I do consider a fetus to be an innocent human being. I have touched the hand a a premie, born at a legally abortable stage. Even in his incubator, with all the equipment and so much going against him, he still grabbed my finger. Up until then, I didn't have much of an opinion on the subject.

How many weeks? You say legally abortable but depending on circumstances that could still be well past viability.

Also, grabbing is a rather important reflex for infant primates, helps them cling to mommyfur. I’m not trying to dehumanize your experience, but emotional responses can add meaning where none exists. Recall Terry Schiavo’s parents claiming she could see and respond to a balloon, and the autopsy pointed out she was completely blind.

I don't recall how many weeks exactly. This happened before NS.

[Quantipapa]

How many weeks? You say legally abortable but depending on circumstances that could still be well past viability.

Also, grabbing is a rather important reflex for infant primates, helps them cling to mommyfur. I’m not trying to dehumanize your experience, but emotional responses can add meaning where none exists. Recall Terry Schiavo’s parents claiming she could see and respond to a balloon, and the autopsy pointed out she was completely blind.

I don't recall how many weeks exactly. This happened before NS.

you speak truth.

[Big Jim P]

I don't recall how many weeks exactly. This happened before NS.

you speak truth.

I speak a personal truth. results may vary for others.

[Quantipapa]

you speak truth.

I speak a personal truth. results may vary for others.

your personal truth resonates with me.

[Godular]

you speak truth.

I speak a personal truth. results may vary for others.

I get the feeling they're reading too much into your statements, as they have done previously with others.

[Quantipapa]

I speak a personal truth. results may vary for others.

I get the feeling they're reading too much into your statements, as they have done previously with others.

I think it's time to lock this post. Clearly nobody is shifting positions, so it classifies as resolved. My opinion.

[Shazbotdom]

I get the feeling they're reading too much into your statements, as they have done previously with others.

I think it's time to lock this post. Clearly nobody is shifting positions, so it classifies as resolved. My opinion.

Thankfully you don't make the decisions about when to lock a thread.

[Telconi]

I think it's time to lock this post. Clearly nobody is shifting positions, so it classifies as resolved. My opinion.

Thankfully you don't make the decisions about when to lock a thread.

The ride never ends.

[Quantipapa]

Thankfully our wise, gracious, and magnanimous moderators do. I was only stating the obvious that clearly this is going nowhere. If you want to make a personal attack me please go ahead.