Why do supporters of legalized abortion call themselves "pro-choice" instead of "pro-abortion"?

[emilynghiem]

ALL dimocraps should be given free abortions, on demand, and $5 from Crime Stop. Plus another $20 from the Keep America Beautiful fund.

Think I'm kidding? You would be wrong.

People want to murder their own progeny? Let them. If they're so stupid that's what they want to do, who do you think you are to try and stop them?

Let them........ No -- Encourage them. Pay for them.

The sooner we get those scumbags out of the gene pool, the better.

morons

Yes, make all the prochoice party pay for their own prochoice health care and mandates.
And let prolife people pay for their own.
And, likewise,
the prolife people and all their ilk
CAN'T have abortions which would be BANNED as illegal
under the health care programs they pay for.

 

[emilynghiem]

Abortion is the best thing republicans have going for them. They can pretend they're for the precious life of the unborn. What hypocrites since they viciously attack any programs the Democrats come up with for helping save lives if it costs on penny in taxes. What hypocrites since they supported bush 1&2 murdering tens of thousands of Iraqi children and their parents. Nope, republicans will never try to end abortion, guaranteed.

Dear jasonnfree
maybe, until the ACA was passed.
Now prochoice are caught contradicting all their arguments they had against prolife.
They practically opened the door for prolife to mandate beliefs since now govt is more important than free choice.

With ACA the right are now championing free choice of health care
[whether they are really pushing solutions or just pretending as you say]
while the prochoice Democrats contradict themselves
1. pushing antichoice laws and mandates that punish taxpayer for wanting free choice in how to pay for health care
2. violating separation of church and state, by nationalizing their BELIEF in "health care as a right" through federal govt as "the law of the land" (over beliefs in the Constitution as the law of the land)
3. discriminating on the basis of CREED, by exempting people with beliefs in "health care as a right" but taxing/penalizing people with beliefs in "life as a right"

So the Democrats just handed their own [ACA's]
over to the conservatives -- whose wins in the elections
were due to PUBLIC OPPOSITION to ACA mandates that go against natural laws
and against the Democrats own principles of free choice, separation of church and state,
and not discriminating on the basis of having different beliefs.
All gone by mandating this ACA as required by law.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

The use of this sort of euphemism suggests to me that abortion supporters themselves aren't entirely convinced of the merits of their position. If abortion isn't wrong, why don't they feel comfortable with the term "pro-abortion"?

I acknowledge that the same could be said of anti-abortion being called "pro-life". I personally find that term corny as well, and generally do not use it to refer to myself.

Because pro-choice describes my position.

I support a woman's right to choose- I am not promoting abortion.

You support a woman's choice of taking an innocent life.

I support a woman having the right to make the choice how her body is used.

Her body (life) is no longer her own when another body (life) grows inside her.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

You support a woman's choice of taking an innocent life.

What supreme arrogance...

Is that what you call "truth" these days?

Are you a woman?

How is that relevant?

How is it relevant? HOW IS IT RELEVANT?!??

Which gender bears the children? Think about it, get back to me in a week.

My gender has no relevance to my position on abortion, dumbass.

 

[Skylar]

The use of this sort of euphemism suggests to me that abortion supporters themselves aren't entirely convinced of the merits of their position. If abortion isn't wrong, why don't they feel comfortable with the term "pro-abortion"?

I acknowledge that the same could be said of anti-abortion being called "pro-life". I personally find that term corny as well, and generally do not use it to refer to myself.

Because pro-choice describes my position.

I support a woman's right to choose- I am not promoting abortion.

You support a woman's choice of taking an innocent life.

I support a woman having the right to make the choice how her body is used.

Her body (life) is no longer her own when another body (life) grows inside her.

Sure it is. She has the right to deny the use of her body to anyone. Or anything.

 

[Pogo]

Is it?
Then the term "pro-life" has no meaning.
Can't have it both ways.

Only to those that are not smart enough to recognize the difference.

Killing a defenseless, innocent life vs killing a person found guilty of a horrendous crime against humanity and sentenced to death.

Yep. You're too stupid to see the difference.

Ah, out of arguments, go to ad hominem.

Either way you're taking a human life. In one case the creator of that life before it begins, in the other case the State. The reason you're doing it is irrelevant; the question is whether either entity has the right.

Now who's "stupid"?

Actually, the poster is Spot-On. There is a difference. But you obviously don't see it. So, you're either a dishonest hypocrite, or you are stupid. It is what it is.

Ah, after putting a "thanks" on the post above he's embarrassed and goes to the same ad hom without an argument to offer. Nothing but "there is a difference but I can't think of what it is, therefore you're stupid".

That's so cute.

Yeah, that's what i figured. You're just stuck on stupid again.

Yeah that's what I figured -- you still can't think of a counterargument.

That's so cute.

 

[Pogo]

What supreme arrogance...

Is that what you call "truth" these days?

Are you a woman?

How is that relevant?

How is it relevant? HOW IS IT RELEVANT?!??

Which gender bears the children? Think about it, get back to me in a week.

My gender has no relevance to my position on abortion, dumbass.

But it has every relevance to your arrogance --- which is what I actually posted in the first place, as can still be seen above.

Dumbass....

 

[Lonestar_logic]

The use of this sort of euphemism suggests to me that abortion supporters themselves aren't entirely convinced of the merits of their position. If abortion isn't wrong, why don't they feel comfortable with the term "pro-abortion"?

I acknowledge that the same could be said of anti-abortion being called "pro-life". I personally find that term corny as well, and generally do not use it to refer to myself.

Because pro-choice describes my position.

I support a woman's right to choose- I am not promoting abortion.

You support a woman's choice of taking an innocent life.

I support a woman having the right to make the choice how her body is used.

Her body (life) is no longer her own when another body (life) grows inside her.

Sure it is. She has the right to deny the use of her body to anyone. Or anything.

So you're ok with the taking of an innocent life. Good to know.

 

[Syriusly]

The use of this sort of euphemism suggests to me that abortion supporters themselves aren't entirely convinced of the merits of their position. If abortion isn't wrong, why don't they feel comfortable with the term "pro-abortion"?

I acknowledge that the same could be said of anti-abortion being called "pro-life". I personally find that term corny as well, and generally do not use it to refer to myself.

Because pro-choice describes my position.

I support a woman's right to choose- I am not promoting abortion.

You support a woman's choice of taking an innocent life.

I support a woman having the right to make the choice how her body is used.

Her body (life) is no longer her own when another body (life) grows inside her.

Wow.....that so much confirms my position that I prefer a woman to control her own body rather than letting old white guys tell her that her body is not her own.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Is that what you call "truth" these days?

Are you a woman?

How is that relevant?

How is it relevant? HOW IS IT RELEVANT?!??

Which gender bears the children? Think about it, get back to me in a week.

My gender has no relevance to my position on abortion, dumbass.

But it has every relevance to your arrogance --- which is what I actually posted in the first place, as can still be seen above.

Dumbass....

Gender has no bearing on arrogance since both sexes can be arrogant, dumbass!

 

[Uncensored2008]

The use of this sort of euphemism suggests to me that abortion supporters themselves aren't entirely convinced of the merits of their position. If abortion isn't wrong, why don't they feel comfortable with the term "pro-abortion"?

I acknowledge that the same could be said of anti-abortion being called "pro-life". I personally find that term corny as well, and generally do not use it to refer to myself.

Truth in advertising works against the goals of the pro-abortion advocates.

 

[Skylar]

Because pro-choice describes my position.

I support a woman's right to choose- I am not promoting abortion.

You support a woman's choice of taking an innocent life.

I support a woman having the right to make the choice how her body is used.

Her body (life) is no longer her own when another body (life) grows inside her.

Sure it is. She has the right to deny the use of her body to anyone. Or anything.

So you're ok with the taking of an innocent life. Good to know.

I'm okay with her deciding for herself how her body will be used. I may not agree with her decision, but I recognize it is hers to make.

Which, coincidentally, is why those who support a woman's right to choose are called 'pro-choice'. As you can find abortion despicable and still recognize a woman's right to make that decision.

 

[Pogo]

Dear Pogo
YES there is a difference.
When I asked an anti-death penalty activist why she wasn't OKAY with death penalty being
a CHOICE as she was with abortion being a CHOICE
she said she trusts woman with the choice of abortion [that affects her directly where the
woman bears the responsibility] but she DIDN'T trust juries and govt with the CHOICE
of putting someone to death [because that doesn't affect them directly, so it can
get skewed by too many other factors because the consequences aren't on them].

Her words were just the part about trusting a woman to make her own decision
about abortion, while not trusting the legal system with the choice of the death penalty.

I added the part CLARIFYING that the woman is making a choice that directly
affects her, while the govt/juries are making a choice of something affecting other people's lives.
They are never punished either way, for making the wrong decision to punish an innocent person.
The judge, jury lawyers are not held to it, so anything can go wrong because they don't pay for it.

Pogo if you are going to be fair, the way I use the death penalty to make an analogy,
when a Catholic Prolife leader asked me how can I be AGAINST abortion and want to prevent it 100% but I am prochoice,
I pointed out that her own Catholic church is AGAINST the death penalty,
yet most people support that as a choice.
We don't believe in BANNING it, but we don't want executions to happen when they could be prevented by preventing murder and crime in the first place.

So I said that my views of abortion are like that.
I believe we can PREVENT it without banning it by PREVENTING unwanted pregnancy
by PREVENTING rape, incest, sexual abuse and relationship abuse by FREE CHOICE,
by informed consent and education as how the Prolife movement already does successfully.
they don't need abortion to be banned in order to prevent completely by free choice.

So this is similar to wanting to get rid of executions by preventing murder.
Not by banning the choice of executions.
I believe we can prevent MOST murder by addressing conflicts and criminal sickness in advance. Most murders can be prevented, just like most abortions can be prevented.
The work on prevention is not something that can be legislated by govt because
it is all personal work and addressing issues on a private level only individuals can do by CHOICE.

So I support free choice, and try to prevent killing and murder that way,
not by banning the choice of abortion and not by banning the choice of executions.
With executions, I would require CONSENSUS since it is a highly spiritual
and religious matter; people would have to AGREE on guilt including the guilty party
and AGREE that no other restitution or other sentencing would serve better, etc.
If people AGREE to give that authority to the govt, as long as it is consensual
I believe that is a choice. But if there is spiritual or religious disagreement,
then that should be resolved first, even if it means having the prolife Catholic groups
pay for the life sentence of restitution or whatever else they can get an agreement on.
I would go for consensus and restorative justice as the model to establish a sentence
and agree who is going to pay for what. If we handles all cases that way, we could prevent murder by intervening and resolving conflicts, ordering treatment for sick people, much
sooner, at the first sign of abuse or complaint, and not wait until a killing occurs to require
a consensus on how to resolve the criminal complaint or charges. So I would intervene much sooner in order to prevent murder, capital crimes and punishment. All without banning executions.

Emily, you really really need to hire an editor. There's no way I'm reading though all of that. None.

My point is simple. Here it is:
The word "life" means "life". Period. It doesn't mean "life" when we want it to and then "death" when its meaning becomes inconvenient.

That's it. Full stop. It's about the definition of a simple word. Not rocket surgery.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

The use of this sort of euphemism suggests to me that abortion supporters themselves aren't entirely convinced of the merits of their position. If abortion isn't wrong, why don't they feel comfortable with the term "pro-abortion"?

I acknowledge that the same could be said of anti-abortion being called "pro-life". I personally find that term corny as well, and generally do not use it to refer to myself.

Because pro-choice describes my position.

I support a woman's right to choose- I am not promoting abortion.

You support a woman's choice of taking an innocent life.

I support a woman having the right to make the choice how her body is used.

Her body (life) is no longer her own when another body (life) grows inside her.

Wow.....that so much confirms my position that I prefer a woman to control her own body rather than letting old white guys tell her that her body is not her own.

You're assuming all women agree with you and all old white guys don't.

Fact is when another life is involved the woman has not only the responsibility but a duty to protect that life. But those that do not value life, like yourself, choose to terminate life out of convenience. You'll be judged at the end so I'm not worried about your soul, but I do have compassion for the innocent lives that never had the chance.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

You support a woman's choice of taking an innocent life.

I support a woman having the right to make the choice how her body is used.

Her body (life) is no longer her own when another body (life) grows inside her.

Sure it is. She has the right to deny the use of her body to anyone. Or anything.

So you're ok with the taking of an innocent life. Good to know.

I'm okay with her deciding for herself how her body will be used. I may not agree with her decision, but I recognize it is hers to make.

Which, coincidentally, is why those who support a woman's right to choose are called 'pro-choice'. As you can find abortion despicable and still recognize a woman's right to make that decision.

It's not "pro-choice", it's pro-abortion. The time for choosing was made at conception.

 

[Edgetho]

ALL dimocraps should be given free abortions, on demand, and $5 from Crime Stop. Plus another $20 from the Keep America Beautiful fund.

Think I'm kidding? You would be wrong.

People want to murder their own progeny? Let them. If they're so stupid that's what they want to do, who do you think you are to try and stop them?

Let them........ No -- Encourage them. Pay for them.

The sooner we get those scumbags out of the gene pool, the better.

morons

When did you get released? Last time I saw you, they were leading you away in a strait jacket.

Shut up and make me a sandwich, bitch.

I am right. You scumbags want to kill your unborn? Go for it. I'll even volunteer to pay for it.

The sooner we get scum like you out of the human gene pool, the better off the Human Race will be.

Where's that sandwich?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Dear Pogo
YES there is a difference.
When I asked an anti-death penalty activist why she wasn't OKAY with death penalty being
a CHOICE as she was with abortion being a CHOICE
she said she trusts woman with the choice of abortion [that affects her directly where the
woman bears the responsibility] but she DIDN'T trust juries and govt with the CHOICE
of putting someone to death [because that doesn't affect them directly, so it can
get skewed by too many other factors because the consequences aren't on them].

Her words were just the part about trusting a woman to make her own decision
about abortion, while not trusting the legal system with the choice of the death penalty.

I added the part CLARIFYING that the woman is making a choice that directly
affects her, while the govt/juries are making a choice of something affecting other people's lives.
They are never punished either way, for making the wrong decision to punish an innocent person.
The judge, jury lawyers are not held to it, so anything can go wrong because they don't pay for it.

Pogo if you are going to be fair, the way I use the death penalty to make an analogy,
when a Catholic Prolife leader asked me how can I be AGAINST abortion and want to prevent it 100% but I am prochoice,
I pointed out that her own Catholic church is AGAINST the death penalty,
yet most people support that as a choice.
We don't believe in BANNING it, but we don't want executions to happen when they could be prevented by preventing murder and crime in the first place.

So I said that my views of abortion are like that.
I believe we can PREVENT it without banning it by PREVENTING unwanted pregnancy
by PREVENTING rape, incest, sexual abuse and relationship abuse by FREE CHOICE,
by informed consent and education as how the Prolife movement already does successfully.
they don't need abortion to be banned in order to prevent completely by free choice.

So this is similar to wanting to get rid of executions by preventing murder.
Not by banning the choice of executions.
I believe we can prevent MOST murder by addressing conflicts and criminal sickness in advance. Most murders can be prevented, just like most abortions can be prevented.
The work on prevention is not something that can be legislated by govt because
it is all personal work and addressing issues on a private level only individuals can do by CHOICE.

So I support free choice, and try to prevent killing and murder that way,
not by banning the choice of abortion and not by banning the choice of executions.
With executions, I would require CONSENSUS since it is a highly spiritual
and religious matter; people would have to AGREE on guilt including the guilty party
and AGREE that no other restitution or other sentencing would serve better, etc.
If people AGREE to give that authority to the govt, as long as it is consensual
I believe that is a choice. But if there is spiritual or religious disagreement,
then that should be resolved first, even if it means having the prolife Catholic groups
pay for the life sentence of restitution or whatever else they can get an agreement on.
I would go for consensus and restorative justice as the model to establish a sentence
and agree who is going to pay for what. If we handles all cases that way, we could prevent murder by intervening and resolving conflicts, ordering treatment for sick people, much
sooner, at the first sign of abuse or complaint, and not wait until a killing occurs to require
a consensus on how to resolve the criminal complaint or charges. So I would intervene much sooner in order to prevent murder, capital crimes and punishment. All without banning executions.

Emily, you really really need to hire an editor. There's no way I'm reading though all of that. None.

My point is simple. Here it is:
The word "life" means "life". Period. It doesn't mean "life" when we want it to and then "death" when its meaning becomes inconvenient.

That's it. Full stop. It's about the definition of a simple word. Not rocket surgery.

In other words, she (pogoloco) is going to remain ignorant.

 

[Skylar]

Fact is when another life is involved the woman has not only the responsibility but a duty to protect that life.

Says you. Such a 'duty' is a deeply personal issue. And its up to the individual woman who is pregnant to decide its scope, or even its existence.

For the record, I agree with you on the above statement. I simply don't believe that my personal beliefs should be imposed upon the body of any woman who doesn't share them. And that abortion is a deeply, personally intimate decision. One that only the woman in making the decision can truly understand the ramifications of.

 

[hazlnut]

I'm not pro abortion. I'd love to see zero abortions. Abortion isn't desirable.

My method for realizing zero abortions is different than yours. It's also better than yours and more likely to succeed. It has already proven to be more effective in reducing the number of abortions.

You won't find a single person who is pro abortion. That's a fucking stupid thing for you to say....even if you couch it in such a sweet and innocent OP.

Try harder.

Awesome post!!


Thanks!!

 

[Synthaholic]

If abortion isn't wrong, why don't they feel comfortable with the term "pro-abortion"?

Because Pro-Choice means that you can choose to have an abortion, or you can choose not to have an abortion.

It's so simple even a wingnut should be able to figure it out.