Is "Pro Choice" Actually "Pro Abortion?"

[Amirah95]

No. Pro-Choice is (IMO) protecting a woman's right to choose and does not force her to have an abortion as some anti-choice groups would have people believe.

On the other hand, Anti-choice (or pro-life) would force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term with no regard for the woman doing the carryin'.

Only one of these two options FORCES a woman to do something, the other gives her an OPTION.

 

[luvsJack]

If you believe in a woman's "right to choose", do you not believe that it is ok for her to choose to have an abortion? I would have to agree with Master Mason in that if you are not against abortion you must be for it or "pro-abortion".

And I know, some of you will say that you are not "for abortion for yoursefl" but think everyone has the right to choose. You have to pick a side here. Either you think abortion is morally wrong or you don't. It cannot be one way for you and another way for someone else.

BTW, being 'pro" anything does not mean you intend to force someone to do it. I am pro-life, but I do not intend to force anyone to have a baby; I just expect everyone that is old enough to have sex to act responsibly about it.

 

[kelleigh1]

No!

 

[stacyp9]

No they don't since what is being debated is abortion. Why not just call it abortion?

Because what is being debated is whether there should be a choice with respect to a woman's pregnancy. There currently are several choices including keeping the child, adoption, foster care, and termination/abortion. Most pro-choice women would not make abortion their personal choice and calling them pro-abortion is misleading. Pro-choice women want all the choices to be available for themselves and for others, it does not mean they would personally make abortion their choice.

The anti-choice movement wants the government to remove the termination choice. They prefer the term pro-life because it helps minimize the discomfort of supporting a platform that allows the government to force women to give birth.

 

[xoprincessmomxo]

If you believe in a woman's "right to choose", do you not believe that it is ok for her to choose to have an abortion? I would have to agree with Master Mason in that if you are not against abortion you must be for it or "pro-abortion".

And I know, some of you will say that you are not "for abortion for yoursefl" but think everyone has the right to choose. You have to pick a side here. Either you think abortion is morally wrong or you don't. It cannot be one way for you and another way for someone else.

BTW, being 'pro" anything does not mean you intend to force someone to do it. I am pro-life, but I do not intend to force anyone to have a baby; I just expect everyone that is old enough to have sex to act responsibly about it.

There ae many things that are one way for me and not someone else. I'm not homosexual, but others can be. I am a Christian, others might be Buddhist. I don't smoke, others do. Should everyone have the exact same beliefs as me? Nope. I'd never force someone to believe exactly the same way I do. Instead, I will live my life the way I see fit and let others do the same.

 

[Master Mason]

But to those that insist someone is proabortion rather than prochoice - I just want to know how much you think that rhetoric helps your cause.

I guess that would depend on what your cause is.

 

[merryweather20]

But yet since you want abortion to be legal, you are by defintion proabortion.

My guess is that you are confused at the terminology.

For pro choice advocates it means exactly what it sound - Someone who is pro choice is in favour of a woman's right to choose between abortion or carrying the fetus.

Pro life on the other hand has a different meaning - A so called pro lifer might set off a bomb at a woman's clinic or murder a doctor in cold blood because he/she does not agree with them. They are not "Pro life" as their name suggests, they are simply anti abortion, and some "Pro lifers" would kill or injure other human beings in order to prevent abortion.

 

[smartestnumber5]

If you believe in a woman's "right to choose", do you not believe that it is ok for her to choose to have an abortion? I would have to agree with Master Mason in that if you are not against abortion you must be for it or "pro-abortion".

And I know, some of you will say that you are not "for abortion for yoursefl" but think everyone has the right to choose. You have to pick a side here. Either you think abortion is morally wrong or you don't. It cannot be one way for you and another way for someone else.

BTW, being 'pro" anything does not mean you intend to force someone to do it. I am pro-life, but I do not intend to force anyone to have a baby; I just expect everyone that is old enough to have sex to act responsibly about it.

The question of whether abortion is morally wrong is a completely different question of whether abortion should be legal or not. So yes, there are plenty of people who think that abortion should be legal, but that it is not "ok" (in the sense of being morally acceptable) for people to get abortions. (I'm not one of these people, because I don't think abortion is immoral.)

There are tons of things that are morally wrong that are legal. There is no conflict at all in thinking that things that are immoral are also things that should be legal and I will bet any amount of $$$$ that you yourself make this distinction all the time. We all do.

For instance, I think it there is a constitutional right protecting free speech that is broad enough to encompass the Neo-Nazis rights to have marches. I sure as hell don't think it is "ok" for them do so--I think they are despicable excuses for human beings. But as citizens of the U.S., no matter how despicable or immoral their actions are, they still have the right of free speech which should not be interfered with by the govt.

Honestly I'm shocked this is such a hard concept given that cases like the Nazi free speech case are widely known, and, I thought uncontroversial. Maybe I am wrong and people on this thread actually want to restrict speech to only that which they happen to find morally acceptable?

 

[luvsJack]

There ae many things that are one way for me and not someone else. I'm not homosexual, but others can be. I am a Christian, others might be Buddhist. I don't smoke, others do. Should everyone have the exact same beliefs as me? Nope. I'd never force someone to believe exactly the same way I do. Instead, I will live my life the way I see fit and let others do the same.

I didn't say everyone could not be different, what I said is that what is morally right or wrong for one person is the same for another. If you believe homsexuality is morally wrong (And I am NOT saying that I think it is) for you then it is morally wrong for someone else. Its either right or its wrong. It cannot be both. Do you believe adultery to be morally wrong? Is it only wrong for your spouse or is it wrong for your neighbor's spouse too? You can't have it both ways and its not a multiple choice question.

 

[jenny105]

Absolutely not.
I am Pro-choice. I believe a woman should be able to decide what happens to her body and her.
I don't agree with abortion as a way of birth control, though.

Agreed

 

[Master Mason]

My guess is that you are confused at the terminology.

For pro choice advocates it means exactly what it sound - Someone who is pro choice is in favour of a woman's right to choose between abortion or carrying the fetus.

Pro life on the other hand has a different meaning - A so called pro lifer might set off a bomb at a woman's clinic or murder a doctor in cold blood because he/she does not agree with them. They are not "Pro life" as their name suggests, they are simply anti abortion, and some "Pro lifers" would kill or injure other human beings in order to prevent abortion.

Nope I am not confused at the terminology in anyway. In fact I quoted the definition of the word way back on page 2

 

[Master Mason]

If you believe in a woman's "right to choose", do you not believe that it is ok for her to choose to have an abortion? I would have to agree with Master Mason in that if you are not against abortion you must be for it or "pro-abortion".

And I know, some of you will say that you are not "for abortion for yoursefl" but think everyone has the right to choose. You have to pick a side here. Either you think abortion is morally wrong or you don't. It cannot be one way for you and another way for someone else.

BTW, being 'pro" anything does not mean you intend to force someone to do it. I am pro-life, but I do not intend to force anyone to have a baby; I just expect everyone that is old enough to have sex to act responsibly about it.

Thank you someone gets what I have been trying to say.

 

[xoprincessmomxo]

I didn't say everyone could not be different, what I said is that what is morally right or wrong for one person is the same for another. If you believe homsexuality is morally wrong (And I am NOT saying that I think it is) for you then it is morally wrong for someone else. Its either right or its wrong. It cannot be both. Do you believe adultery to be morally wrong? Is it only wrong for your spouse or is it wrong for your neighbor's spouse too? You can't have it both ways and its not a multiple choice question.

Let's just say, I'll leave the judgement up to God and worry about my own sins instead of my neighbors. Instead, I will chose to love my neighbor as myself. When God appoints me head of his supreme court of judges, I will let you know where I stand on everyone else points of morality.

 

[merryweather20]

Nope I am not confused at the terminology in anyway. In fact I quoted the definition of the word way back on page 2

You are mistaken you quoted the definition of pro-abortion, not pro choice.

Let me say again its right in the name in plain english pro-choice it means what it says; for choice.

 

[rotlex]

And again, I didn't make up the definition, or design the english language.

I don't know how old you are, but I am old enough to remember when people used to have rallies and hold up signs claiming themselves to be pro abortion. That didn't mean they were wanting everyone to get one, it meant they wanted it to be legal.

It is only in our PC society, where everyone wishes to sugar coat things, and come up with new phrases for things to make them sound nicer than they really are that we even have this discussion.

Your last statement absolutely nails it.

 

[Goofyluver]

If I had a uterus that would be the medical miracle of the ages.

I meant the figurative "you"...not you in specifics.

But, thanks for the laugh.

There ae many things that are one way for me and not someone else. I'm not homosexual, but others can be. I am a Christian, others might be Buddhist. I don't smoke, others do. Should everyone have the exact same beliefs as me? Nope. I'd never force someone to believe exactly the same way I do. Instead, I will live my life the way I see fit and let others do the same.

Word.

I didn't say everyone could not be different, what I said is that what is morally right or wrong for one person is the same for another. If you believe homsexuality is morally wrong (And I am NOT saying that I think it is) for you then it is morally wrong for someone else. Its either right or its wrong. It cannot be both. Do you believe adultery to be morally wrong? Is it only wrong for your spouse or is it wrong for your neighbor's spouse too? You can't have it both ways and its not a multiple choice question.

Pro-choice (for me) is not a moral decision. My morals and my values have nothing to do with my belief that a woman has the right to choose what she does with her own body. It's her choice.

Notice...I've never said what I do or do not believe on abortion.

And why is that?

Because my personal beliefs...no matter what they are...should have no effect on what another person is allowed or not allowed to do with their own body. It's none of my business what a woman chooses or does not choose to do with her uterus.

This is not about right or wrong at all.

It's about you (the figurative you) having the ability to choose what is the RIGHT decision or the WRONG decision for you. I should have nothing to do with that decision. And neither should the government.

 

[merryweather20]

Your last statement absolutely nails it.

Are you and Master Mason simply ticked off that the Pro choice movement has decided to use accurate terminology There is no sugar coating, it is as it sounds a group that is, for choice.

Pro life on the other hand is sugar coated to the hilt. They will use violence and murder to promote their ant-abortion agenda. They use pro life because they don't think anti-choice sounds as good, they want to "sugar coat" their position.

 

[Master Mason]

Let's just say, I'll leave the judgement up to God and worry about my own sins instead of my neighbors. Instead, I will chose to love my neighbor as myself. When God appoints me head of his supreme court of judges, I will let you know where I stand on everyone else points of morality.

Morals and judgement are not the same time. I can feel something is morally wrong, and not judge you for your belief that it is morally correct.

But your morals can not change accross people. If you were to believe it is morally wrong to J walk, then you would have to feel that anyone that j walks is immoral. Your not required to judge them or condemn them, but if you don't feel it is wrong for others to j walk, then it really isn't a moral decision for you.

 

[Master Mason]

You are mistaken you quoted the definition of pro-abortion, not pro choice.

Let me say again its right in the name in plain english pro-choice it means what it says; for choice.

Ok i'll bite. Please explain to me how one can be pro choice, but not believe that abortion should be legal?

 

[rotlex]

Are you and Master Mason simply ticked off that the Pro choice movement has decided to use accurate terminology There is no sugar coating, it is as it sounds a group that is, for choice.

Pro life on the other hand is sugar coated to the hilt. They will use violence and murder to promote their ant-abortion agenda. They use pro life because they don't think anti-choice sounds as good, they want to "sugar coat" their position.

Ticked off? No. Saddened, yes. Saddened that our society has become so numb to the taking of innocent life, that they consider it a "choice". As far as Pro-life sugar coating anything by using violence and murder to do so? Wow, you really, really look at things differently than I do. I feel sorry for you, really.