Log in

No account? Create an account
Recent Entries Friends Archive Profile ScrapBook my other bloggy thingy
I've been pretty much cleaning all day and when I do that I end up thinking just random thing - that was one of the things I was thinking. I didn't really mean it as truth - but, rather, something I was contemplating while scrubbing my floors.

I should have thought before I typed because, really, it wasn't a statement but a question in my head.

Here's how I SHOULD have typed that:

"Does "pro-life" always mean "anti-choice?"

A break from the cleaning and a search on the net offers some ideas:
From Greg Staples: Pro-Life is not Anti-Choice/Pro-Choice is not Anti-Life

From Dave Armstrong: Pro-Life, Pro-Choice, Anti-Abortion, Anti-Choice: Definitional and Descriptive Fairness and Accuracy in the Abortion Debate, and Larger Implications

From Sazz: Pro-Choice/Pro-Life, Anti-Life/Anti-Choice

Wikipedia weighs in (always an unbiased opinion - right? Right?):
Pro Life
Pro Choice

From the Planned Parenthood Association of Edmonton:
Choice vs. Anti-Choice

Dana Williams has this observation: Analysis of the Commonplace Terms "Pro Life" and "Pro Choice"

Good Year for the Outlaw has Pro Life = Anti Choice

Pregnant Pause gives us this: What's in a name? Pro-Life, Pro-Choice

So - just a round of blogs, articles and comments. Some from credited sources, some from people just trying to figure it out. Me? I don't know how to answer that question, and after six hours of cleaning, I STILL don't know how to answer the question.
WIkipedia makes a good point that Pro-Life is emblematic of more than abortion, but rather anti-euthanasia, etc, while Pro-Choice applies only to Abortion.

Personally, I don't think the names are useful, at all. The question really has to be: Is, or is not, Abortion an okay thing, and should it be legal?

I don't think there's a lot of wiggle room to say, Abortion isn't okay, but it should be legal, because of the repercussions, morally, of saying that.
Did you get the package I sent you earlier this week? I couldn't remember your unit number so I just mailed it to your address and let them figure out who "Meg Bridge" is.
Yup! I did get it and I've started reading the series (my apt number is 102 for future reference)

Have you started TransMet?
No, I haven't even had the time to read the comics I bought on Wednesday. But I will soon.
No worries - I totally know how that goes. I'd love to hear your reactions to it when you're done though.
That's because "Pro-choice" vs. "Pro-Life" is a false dichotomy. Since they argue complete different arguments, there isn't likely to ever be an agreement between the two.

Everyone is "Pro-life", basically. I am. I think life is great. I am also opposed to murder in general and war too. I'm definitely "Pro-life" in every way. Just like most Pro-choicers are.

So basically, the "Pro-life" vs... "Pro-death" argument is a little ridiculous. I'm sure Ed Gein or someone was pro-death, but a mass movement it is not.

It really boils down to figuring out at what point will your conscience allow you to see a pregnancy aborted? Even "Pro-choicers" have a line, a point in the pregnancy where it is no longer acceptable. But if you can concede that there is a window of time where the complex multicellular organism that is more a part of the mother than a unique organism isn't really a person yet... then it's a matter of deciding if people should be allowed a choice.
Indeed. It seems to me that while there is certainly a *contingent* of pro-lifers who are against abortion in part because everyone who can reproduce, should... really, it's just two different points that both have their pros and cons.

I mean, I'd categorize myself as "pro-life," but I don't think anyone who knows me could seriously think that I'm against the right of a woman to choose the direction of her life, whether or not she has children, etc. I'm totally in favor of the right to choose whether to bear children through the education on and use of contraception in all its forms, all the way across the spectrum from abstinence to the morning-after pill and everything in between. I have used a number of such methods myself over the course of my life as a way of excercising my choice.

But what I'm *against* is the destruction of a separate and distinct human life in the name of that choice. And I think a great many people who favor the continued legalization of abortion, if they're really being serious with themselves, can see the nuance in that position. They might disagree with my priorities, they might even disagree on the point at which the fetus becomes a person with rights. But it's hard to be intellectually honest and still villify me as someone who wants to see women banished back to their husbands' and fathers' kitchens.

It seems to me that characterizing the entire population of people who are "pro-life" as "anti-choice" is just as destructive and useless to the debate as categorizing all "pro-choice" people as pro-death or anti-baby or whatever.

And yet, there are hundreds of thousands of people whose very jobs depend on prolonging the debate as long as possible, and on not giving an inch, and so they villify their opposition in order to prove to their base what a good and zealous job they're doing for the "cause," thus extending this debate for decades upon decades, all the while not actually succeeding in making anything at all better for women.
So i dont' have time to read the links right now, but here is how i feel about it. I'm pro-choice, meaning that i think women should have the right to choose. BUT, i have always felt that if i were pregnant i would never be able to have an abortion, so maybe in that sense i am pro-life.

But really what it boils down to, is that people try too hard to label things. You either have to be one or the other. And i don't really think that is how the world works. One doesn't necessarily cancel out the other. The same goes for the war. Just because i am against the war doesn't mean i don't support the troops. You know?