Why Is Pro-Choice Substituted For Pro-Abortion?

Part of the Left's global strategy is to control the word game. This includes changing the definition of existing words, making up new words ("homophobia"), and putting a pretty face on evil things - which is what "pro-choice" is all about.

A woman has a dozen different ways to choose not to have a child, starting with avoiding reproductive activity with men who are not suitable to father their children. Various forms of contraception follow, as does surgical intervention. Once the woman is pregnant, the "choice" is already made.

"If you didn't want to go to Chicago, why did you get on the bus?" - Garrison Keillor
 
Because they are not Pro Abortion. They want women to have the choice. If they choose not to have an abortion, or choose to have an abortion, it is their choice.

Being pro choice is pro abortion. Two phrases, one meaning.

If you support pro choice then you support women killing their unborn children. Even if they themselves don't have an abortion they are pro other women doing it.

It boils down to, you're ok with murdering babies or you aren't. There is no gray area, even at 3 weeks it's murdering a baby because if you don't do anything then it will be born.
 
Because I am not Pro Abortion. I am in favor of the choice being left to the woman.

So then you are alright with abortion.

So you are okay with a woman killing a baby inside or outside the womb?


Believe me, i am glad as fuck that the progressive women have been murdering their babies in the 10s of millions since Roe. Think about all those Democrat voters that never got to see the light of day. Also all those black kids that never ever too a breath.

Guess you are all okay with that?


I see what you're saying but in all seriousness I'm still not alright with abortion because everybody starts off as an innocent baby.


Stupidest thing I have ever read. Stupidest.


I was talking about for liberals, not everybody in general.
 
So then you are alright with abortion.



I see what you're saying but in all seriousness I'm still not alright with abortion because everybody starts off as an innocent baby.





I was talking about for liberals, not everybody in general.

I am not alright with abortion. But it is not my decision to make for someone else.
 
I guess it could seem that way. Unless you consider the possibility that the freedom of others is important to me, as it should be to all.


So does that mean that anybody should have the right to shoot their child or children in the head if they make the free choice to? Where do you draw the line?
 
So does that mean that anybody should have the right to shoot their child or children in the head if they make the free choice to? Where do you draw the line?

Sure! Shoot them in the head. Be sure an lay down plastic first. Makes the cleanup easier.
 
Sure! Shoot them in the head. Be sure an lay down plastic first. Makes the cleanup easier.


I do hope and pray that you're being sarcastic. You didn't answer my question either of where exactly you draw the line.
 
Because they are not Pro Abortion. They want women to have the choice. If they choose not to have an abortion, or choose to have an abortion, it is their choice.

As an example my Wife is ardently anti-abortion. But she doesn't feel that government should be involved .
 
This woman completely nailed it. The thing is the people on the left know exactly what they stand for and that's why this "pro-choicer" is getting so nervous. It's because they know that they got caught.




For the same reason anti-abortion is substituted for 'pro-life'. In fact, anti-abortion should be labeled pro-death, given that the statistics in no-abortion states shows the death of women increases where abortions are not allowed.

According to a report by The Commonwealth Fund, maternal death rates in 2020 were 62% higher in the 26 states that presently have bans or serious restrictions on abortion access than in the 24 states with better abortion access
 

Why Is Pro-Choice Substituted For Pro-Abortion?​


It's more politically correct to focus on a woman's right to choose rather than the choice being the ending of an unborn life. It shifts the attention away from a dead baby to the mother's rights. Is it morally defensible to grant civil rights to a child 5 minutes after it is born but not 5 minutes before? Are we sanctioning murder if a child is aborted? It is after all an individual with it's own DNA; I have not heard a logical argument for why someone's right to exist is superceded by another person's right to choose to end that life. Yes, yes, we can argue about rape and incest and the mother's health as reasonable exceptions, but I have yet to read about the 5 minute question.
 

Why Is Pro-Choice Substituted For Pro-Abortion?​


It's more politically correct to focus on a woman's right to choose rather than the choice being the ending of an unborn life. It shifts the attention away from a dead baby to the mother's rights. Is it morally defensible to grant civil rights to a child 5 minutes after it is born but not 5 minutes before? Are we sanctioning murder if a child is aborted? It is after all an individual with it's own DNA; I have not heard a logical argument for why someone's right to exist is superceded by another person's right to choose to end that life. Yes, yes, we can argue about rape and incest and the mother's health as reasonable exceptions, but I have yet to read about the 5 minute question.
Because no person under law, has the right to endanger another person. I cannot force another person to give me their kidney, much less their life to save mine.

That is not the case with motherhood and childbirth. That is a unique liability of the mother, and only the mother. Anti abortion laws have the government put liability of harm or death on the mother, even against their will. And guss which sex wouldn't put up with that if it were imposed on them...
 

Forum List

Back
Top