Memo to Pro-Lifers: Stop calling abortion zealots “pro-choice!”

I was thinking about “choice,” today, and the victory of the Left over common sense, as evidenced by seeing people on the Right refer to abortion zealots as, “pro-choice.” Is there anything more ironic than the “pro-choice” position?

It’s the position that certain unborn children, at the discretion of their mothers, should be deprived of absolutely every choice they might be allowed or required to make over the course of their whole lives. Why? Because their mothers chose to kill them before they could even choose whether to cry, or sleep, or eat.

That’s “pro-choice?”

They might choose to vote Democrat, or to become “community organizers,” or to join PETA, or the PTA, or to become officers in Obama’s “civilian militia” — but they can’t — because they’re dead.

Their options do not exist, because their mothers chose, for any reason, or for no reason, to let them be killed before they could make that first, inconsequential choice. A million and a half human beings  a year, are dead for any reason, or for no reason, other than “the right to choose.”

A lifetime of choices, from the trivial to the momentous — so many choices — caf or decaf, smoking or non, SUV or hybrid, urban or rural, abstinent or promiscuous, idealistic or pragmatic… How many choices is that, over a whole life that was “choiced” away, times a million and a half lives a year?

And that’s “pro-choice?”

No. That’s a lie.

It’s anti-choice; it’s pro-death, and we should never, ever call it “pro-choice.”

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

7 Responses to “Memo to Pro-Lifers: Stop calling abortion zealots “pro-choice!””

  1. endithinks Says:

    Pro Life should mean against all human caused death right? How can Pro lifers be anything but pacifists? Anyone who is pro life and pro war or any type of military killing is a hypocrite. If life is more important than anything then you cannot abide by war even in the event when you are defending yourself (which none of the wars we are fighting are defensive. All the wars we are fighting are revenge based. We are getting back the guys who hit us.)

    Please explain how Pro Lifers are not Anti War.

  2. tomcox Says:

    “Pro Life should mean against all human caused death right?”

    Wrong. Look up the difference between “killing” and “murder.”

    “If life is more important than anything…”

    It isn’t. Somebody far smarter than I, said, “If nothing is worth dying for, then nothing is worth living for.”

    The argument that someone who is pro-life should be a pacifist (or, more accurately, a “passivist”) is bogus. One sometimes must act to defend the innocent and helpless against violence.

    Don’t ask me to defend “wars we are fighting.” Iraq wasn’t a war I would’ve gotten us into, and if it had to be fought, it isn’t being fought the way I’d have it fought. Nobody asked me, however.

    Just curious — How do you distinguish between “defensive wars” and “getting back [at] the guys who hit us”?

    Thanks for reading and taking the time to comment. — TC

  3. endithinks Says:

    Thanks for responding to my comment. Killing and murder are the same in my definition. The ending of life on purpose. (I hate abortion by the way. I think it is disgusting and I also think that prevention is the way to stop it.)

    I don’t think you need to die to live. I really disagree with that worth fighting for. And secondly why does fighting have to equate killing? We can and have fought hard on many issues without resorting to killing. Civil Rights, Women’s right to Vote, India overthrowing Britain, peace protests against Vietnam, and so on.

    Who are we defending in Iraq? We’ve been the cause of more death there than Saddam was. The violence that we incited by our presence of overthrowing a Sunni minority government and replacing it with a Shiite majority government (by the way Iran is Shiite as well) is the reason 4000 of our troops have died and tens of thousands of Iraqis. Who are we defending truly? Did Iraq have anything to do with 9/11?

    Defensive wars are when you protect your own country by having an effective navy (to stop any troops coming) and a land force that defneds your own country at home. This idea of preemption is a flawed military thought that Bush and his cronies invented to take out an enemy they have wanted to fight from the late nineties.

    A war of revenge is what we are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and we are losing. We are making the terrorists stronger by driving up their recruitment numbers. When normal people feel attacked they will do things they normally would not do, such as join an extremist group. Al Queda did not even exist in Iraq before we invaded. We are making the “normal” people feel like they have no choice and in desperation they are being driven to join extremist.

    What we need to do is stop the recruiting of normal people by winning hearts and minds of people by inspiring hope, by showing we are not aggressive and power hungry. We need to rebuild their neighborhoods and pour money into the country. We can win more friends through honey than through fly tape.

    Pro Life means “For Life.” How is revenge killing justified?

    Thanks for reading sorry so long of a response. 🙂

  4. tomcox Says:

    “Killing and murder are the same in my definition.”

    I could just as easily say, “Red lights and green lights are just the same, in my definition.” But I wouldn’t expect “my definition” to get me through a busy intersection against the red light.

    They are not the same. In fact, one may legitimately kill to prevent murder. Again, rather than relying on your own, private definitions of public terms, look them up.

    I am encouraged to hear you think abortion is “disgusting.” Do you think it is wrong?

    Again, I will not defend the Iraq War.

    The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are only two, overt manifestations of a world-wide war, between Dar al Islam (the Islamic World) and Dar al Harb (the world of war) — in other words, from the Islamic perspective, between the muslim world and the rest of the world. This war has been fought for 1600 years, and will not stop until it is won and lost.

    We are not “recruiting” our enemies in this war — they are simply responding to the socio-political imperative set forth in the Koran. Read it — especially the Ninth Sura. Authoritative, English-language versions are available on the Web.

    Read “Islam 101” on http://www.jihadwatch.org.

    “How is revenge killing justified?”

    I’m not sure what you mean by, “revenge killing, but I can say that if I am not willing to kill someone who would deliberately take my life, or the life of an innocent third party in my care, I am deciding that neither my life, nor that of the innocent is of value. I have no right to make such a decision. You may decide for yourself, but not for me.

    I don’t have time at the moment to continue a dialog, but I hope you will drop by again and read, and comment. I am new at this blogging stuff, and I have other business that requires attention.

    Be safe.

  5. paragraphein Says:

    “I could just as easily say, “Red lights and green lights are just the same, in my definition.” But I wouldn’t expect “my definition” to get me through a busy intersection against the red light.”

    But you DO expect your assertion that pro-choice and pro-abortion are the same things to pass muster here. How ironic.

    I am not pro-abortion. I do not promote abortion. I do not like to see abortions happen.

    However, I am pro-letting-women-make-the-choice-themselves.

    So, just as saying “green lights and red lights are the same thing in my definition” does not actually make green and red the same color, so saying “pro-choice is the same as pro-abortion” does not actually make it so.

  6. tomcox Says:

    Sort of standing up a straw man, aren’t you? I addressed my essay to “people on the Right” who have fallen into calling abortion zealots “pro-choice.”

    What abortion zealots and those who pose behind the Cintonesque position that abortion should be “safe, legal and rare,” choose to call themselves, is their marketing problem, not mine.

    Both groups think it is OK, under some circumstances, to kill unborn human beings, thus depriving those human beings of every choice they might ever make. Is there a kind of abortion that doesn’t do that?

    Thanks for reading.

  7. paragraphein Says:

    “Both groups think it is OK, under some circumstances, to kill unborn human beings, thus depriving those human beings of every choice they might ever make. Is there a kind of abortion that doesn’t do that?”

    And again, I am not in favor of abortions.

    Seems you’re the one setting up a strawman.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: