Abortion Debate Forum - Pro-choice, Anti-choice, Pro-life And Pro-abortion

yodavater

replied on December 20th, 2007

Active User, very eHealthy

Re: Pro-choice, Anti-choice, Pro-life And Pro-abortion

Eiri wrote:

OPINIONS ONLY. I will ignore any and ALL dictionary definitions on this topic. I don't care what a dictionary has to say: I care what YOU have to say.

Fair enough.

I think I'll start a thread on "The effects of pollution on aquatic life", and reject all actual scientific evidence submitted..... and only accept opinions instead.

|

Tylanas

replied on December 20th, 2007

Especially eHealthy

Please stay on topic. Either get off this thread, or post your own opinions about the question.

|

Darkmoon

replied on December 20th, 2007

Active User, very eHealthy

I think that using terms people know are offensive and considered inaccurate by the majority of the other side is a dishonest way to frame a debate. We could go on all day long about why we think we're justified in using these terms for the opposition, and the recipients of said terms could go on all day long about why it's inaccurate and offensive.

It would go absolutely nowhere because neither side will listen or accept these "provocative" terms for their stance.

I feel it's better to either specify a separate group or person from the rest of the stance when using such terms or avoid using them altogether. Everyone loses their cool now and then and slips up, but that's a far cry from deliberately and repeatedly using the terms and then insisting that the other side shouldn't do the same.

I think it turns a debate into a schoolyard playground where everyone is more interested in shouting "I know you are, but what am I?" than actually discussing the issues.

There's my tuppence.

|

jenn_smithson

replied on December 20th, 2007

Active User, very eHealthy

Re: Pro-choice, Anti-choice, Pro-life And Pro-abortion

Okay, I know you said you didn't want dictionary definitions but if I may just add a couple of things about the dictionary definitions?

First, the definitions of the "prochoice" and "proabortion" are identical with regards to the dictionary. Obviously, though, both of those stances are NOT identical or there would be no need to argue the semantics of either or for anyone to use one over the other for any specific purpose. That they are being used to highlight different attitudes or different ranges of an attitude indicates that emotionally, despite whatever their definitions are, the two words have different meanings to each of us and thus, are different. Because the dictionary only recognizes vague meanings, the nuance of each is left for us to determine.

To me, then, "proabortion" means favoring abortion as the only choice for every pregnancy. However few their numbers are, there are people who believe that no one should be reproducing or that only they should be allowed to reproduce.

"Prochoice" means supporting legalized abortion as A choice that a pregnant woman can make. (Which is the definition of both words).

It is interesting to note, though, that the dictionary definitions of "prolife" and "antichoice" are different from one another. The overly simplified definition of "prolife" is someone opposed to legalized abortion. The overly simplified definition of "antichoice" is someone "opposed to the concept that a pregnant woman has the right to choose abortion."

Really, I think in this case, the dictionary definitions do both labels some amount of justice.

And the dictionary, just in case some of you don't know, isn't really "proof" of anything. It is not the same as study findings or experiment results.

Peace,
Jenn

|

Kypros

replied on December 20th, 2007

Experienced User

Re: Pro-choice, Anti-choice, Pro-life And Pro-abortion

yodavater wrote:

Eiri wrote:

OPINIONS ONLY. I will ignore any and ALL dictionary definitions on this topic. I don't care what a dictionary has to say: I care what YOU have to say.

Fair enough.

I think I'll start a thread on "The effects of pollution on aquatic life", and reject all actual scientific evidence submitted..... and only accept opinions instead.

Absolutely fantastic! I wouldn't have even been able to think that one up Laughing

. At the moment I consider you as the only person who fully understands my posts and possible I am the only person who undestands yours. That's pretty sad really since our views on abortion are totally different, but che sera Very Happy

.

Eiri, I'm afraid that I'll have to discuss dictionary definitions otherwise discussing semantics would be pointless!. Words don't mean what people think fits their opinions; they have established nuances!

Eiri wrote:

yodavater wrote:

Eiri wrote:

I am NOT pro-abortion. .

Fine. Then you are AGAINST the legal status of elective abortion, because that's what proabortion means.

You can continue to make up your "fantasy" definitions all day long, but I will stick to REAL definitions, thanks!

No, pro-abortion means you believe that abortion is the right solution in most - if not all - cases of pregnancy. If you are pro-abortion you may even support forced abortions and promoting abortion beyond simply informing a woman of the choice; you will in fact try to actively convince most women to abort their pregnancies for whatever reason. You do not believe there is ever anything ethically wrong with an abortion no matter how many a woman has or how late-term she aborts.

THAT is pro-abortion.

Eiri, don't hide your intelligence. It's like talking to a brick wall. Pro-abortion DOES NOT mean that, at all! Pro-abortion = FOR/IN SUPPORT OF ABORTION. There is no logic or bases whatsoever for saying that it means "believing abortion is the right solution for all pregnancies". It's like you picked the definition out of a hat-full of 200 possibilities.

For as long as you keep denying what pro-abortion denotes I'll say that pro-choice means "belief that the choice to abort blond-haired babies can only be justified provided that the woman conceived the foetus on a Wednesday afternoon". It's that ridiculous. Semantics are vital to the abortion debate.

__________

Based on what the terms mean in reality (not a pro-choice fairytale) and logic:

Pro-choice = literally means "supports/for/in favour of choice". Supports the legal right of a woman to choose to have an abortion (personal attitudes are irrelevant. Somebody who finds abortion to be abhorrent yet nevertheless an inherent right would still be pro-choice - her own choice being that she wouldn't ever terminate)

Pro-abortion = literally means "supports/for/in favour of abortion". Supports the legal right of a woman to choose to have an abortion (personal attitudes are irrelevant. Somebody who finds abortion to be abhorrent yet nevertheless an inherent right would still be pro-abortion - her own choice being that she wouldn't ever terminate). The tenuous difference between pro-abortion and pro-choice lies in the verbatim denotations of the terms. For example, a forced abortion would fall under the former ("for abortion") and not the latter (it isn't "for choice"). Regardless, it doesn't necessarily mean that somebody who identifies as pro-abortion advocates forced abortions.

To conclude, all pro-choicers are pro-abortion but not all pro-abortionists are pro-choice (as in the case above).

Pro-life = literally means "supports/for/in favour of life". Opposes the legal right of a woman to choose to have an abortion. It seeks, thus, to make abortion illegal.

Anti-choice = literally means "against/opposed to choice". Opposes the legal right of a woman to choose to have an abortion. It seeks, thus, to make abortion illegal. The tenuous difference is exactly the same as between pro-choice and pro-abortion - forced abortions are anti-choice, but not pro-life (obviously!). Regardless, it doesn't necessarily mean all anti-choicers support forced abortions.

To conclude, all pro-lifers are anti-choice but not all anti-choicers are pro-life (as in the case above). In fact, based on semantics and definitions, forced abortions are better described as anti-choice rather than pro-abortion for reasons of accuracy.

Eiri, you may have been quick to speak disparagingly of yoda, but s/he was spot on. If you want to discuss these terms based on opinions then go to a primary school class. Based on that logic, abortion is murder because that is the pro-lifers' opinions of it. It isn't logically cohesive.

Pro-abortion is almost identical to pro-choice but with a different emphasis, just as pro-life and anti-choice are. The terms aren't disgusting or pejorative - use them and wear them with pride because they represent your beliefs. You once said you aren't and never would be pro-abortion, in which case you are pro-life and seek the delegalisation of abortion. The risibly inane concept that pro-abortion inherently means "supports abortion in every case of every pregnancy... and supports the forced abortion policy in China" is a pro-choice-made load of bullpoop. It has no backbone and has sprung out of nowhere because of politically correct "I'm-scared-to-stop-using-euphemisms" pro-choicers who can't hold a proper debate.

Sorry, love.

|

Tylanas

replied on December 20th, 2007

Especially eHealthy

Thank you for sharing your OPINIONS, but the attitude wasn't necessary.

Remember, no matter what YOU think about the definitions of these terms, they are only OPINIONS and not everyone thinks the same way you do. The point of this thread is to see what everyone's OPINIONS are in relation to these four terms.

I'll be honest. I didn't really read most of your post because it was snarky and full of attitude. If you'd like to re-write it politely, then I'll read it. I've discovered on this forum that the best thing to do when people have attitudes is to ignore them.

|

Kypros

replied on December 20th, 2007

Experienced User

Me with the attitude? I think that offends me more than anything. I could say that you have an attitude (as I think you do) regarding the constant spineless refusal to accept pro-abortion, but why be defeatist and ignore it? That's utterly child-like and resolves nothing at all. I am met with a lot of so-called attitude on these fora but it won't stop me debating what I feel is right. I hate to dwell on the issue and don't really want it mentioned but I truly believe that, as a 16-year old, I've done very well in maintaining my position on this discussion.

What I've said aren't mere opinion, if you'll allow me to explain. They are my descriptions that explain logically-backed, properly-established definitions.

Don't bother creating a new thread if you're going to ignore well-grounded posts (full of expression, not snarkiness (if that's not a word I apologise in advance)) you don't like. I invite you to throughly read my post, if you wish to sort out this argument.

|

Birch

replied on December 20th, 2007

Extremely eHealthy

I haven't said anything about this whole definition business yet because I've been carefully reading what everyone has to say. I'm going to put my two cents in now.

Proabortion and prochoice are the same thing.

Prolife and antichoice are the same thing.

I recognize that slang definitions may be attached by the misinformed so I will restrain myself from using 'proabortion' and 'antichoice' to avoid a barrage of semantic mud slinging that only clouds the issue and inadvertently makes people look, well, ridiculously in denial or immensely insecure.

|

Tylanas

replied on December 20th, 2007

Especially eHealthy

Eiri, don't hide your intelligence. It's like talking to a brick wall.
It's like you picked the definition out of a hat-full of 200 possibilities.
For as long as you keep denying what pro-abortion denotes I'll say that pro-choice means "belief that the choice to abort blond-haired babies can only be justified provided that the woman conceived the foetus on a Wednesday afternoon". It's that ridiculous.
Based on what the terms mean in reality (not a pro-choice fairytale) and logic
The risibly inane concept that pro-abortion inherently means "supports abortion in every case of every pregnancy... and supports the forced abortion policy in China" is a pro-choice-made load of bullpoop.
It has no backbone and has sprung out of nowhere because of politically correct "I'm-scared-to-stop-using-euphemisms" pro-choicers who can't hold a proper debate.
Sorry, love.

All of the above, most notably the parts bolded, are full of attitude and in some cases right-out insults. Please don't try to act like you're the innocent one. Now it's too late to edit your post, but you could try re-typing it.

|

Birch

replied on December 20th, 2007

Extremely eHealthy

Kypros wrote:

I hate to dwell on the issue and don't really want it mentioned but I truly believe that, as a 16-year old, I've done very well in maintaining my position on this discussion.

You're sixteen???

Fantastic!!!

There is hope for the world.

|

Tylanas

replied on December 20th, 2007

Especially eHealthy

Birch wrote:

I haven't said anything about this whole definition business yet because I've been carefully reading what everyone has to say. I'm going to put my two cents in now.

Proabortion and prochoice are the same thing.

Prolife and antichoice are the same thing.

I recognize that slang definitions may be attached by the misinformed so I will restrain myself from using 'proabortion' and 'antichoice' to avoid a barrage of semantic mud slinging that only clouds the issue and inadvertently makes people look, well, ridiculously in denial or immensely insecure.

Do you think it may be time in this long debate to widen out scope? I've met so many pro-lifers who aren't obsessed with stopping every single abortion; yet they and I would never classify them as pro-choice. I've stopped trying to tell someone who considers them-self pro-life that they are pro-choice. Instead, I have realised that what I need to do is redefine my concepts of pro-choice and pro-life. That's the major thing I've learned on this forum.

The abortion debate is not black and white - I've always known that. It thus seems ridiculous to me that the "sides" are black and white too.

I've remained pro-choice, but my views of the other side have changed considerably. I think just because someone has remained a brick-wall in their beliefs doesn't make them commendable. If a pro-lifer had said what Kypros just said, you would tell them they're just blinding themselves. Talk about a double standard.

|

Kypros

replied on December 20th, 2007

Experienced User

Eiri wrote:

Eiri, don't hide your intelligence. It's like talking to a brick wall.
It's like you picked the definition out of a hat-full of 200 possibilities.
For as long as you keep denying what pro-abortion denotes I'll say that pro-choice means "belief that the choice to abort blond-haired babies can only be justified provided that the woman conceived the foetus on a Wednesday afternoon". It's that ridiculous.
Based on what the terms mean in reality (not a pro-choice fairytale) and logic
The risibly inane concept that pro-abortion inherently means "supports abortion in every case of every pregnancy... and supports the forced abortion policy in China" is a pro-choice-made load of bullpoop.
It has no backbone and has sprung out of nowhere because of politically correct "I'm-scared-to-stop-using-euphemisms" pro-choicers who can't hold a proper debate.
Sorry, love.

All of the above, most notably the parts bolded, are full of attitude and in some cases right-out insults. Please don't try to act like you're the innocent one. Now it's too late to edit your post, but you could try re-typing it.

Sorry, Eiri, but I do (unashamedly) think I'm the innocent one. The things you highlighted would only be considered offensive in terms of political correctness (to which, by the way, I categorically object); I just seem them as vivid expressions of free speech. I don't, not even looking back at them now, see them as pejorative or snarky and that definitely wasn't the intention. And they weren't personally directed at you either, if that's the impression you got.

Birch wrote:

You're sixteen???

Fantastic!!!

There is hope for the world.

Are things that bad Embarassed

!

Eiri wrote:

Do you think it may be time in this long debate to widen out scope? I've met so many pro-lifers who aren't obsessed with stopping every single abortion; yet they and I would never classify them as pro-choice. I've stopped trying to tell someone who considers them-self pro-life that they are pro-choice. Instead, I have realised that what I need to do is redefine my concepts of pro-choice and pro-life. That's the major thing I've learned on this forum.

The abortion debate is not black and white - I've always known that. It thus seems ridiculous to me that the "sides" are black and white too.

I disagree. Why should I try to change - or even want to try to change - an established meaning just because certain people cannot relate to it? That's ridiculous and provokes problems like this very one we're embroiled in. It's such people who need to re-define their mistaken concepts of pro-life and pro-choice. As I said before, a woman who finds abortion ethically abhorrent but still doesn't want to enforce that ideal on the law is essentially pro-choice - her choice being that she would never abort. Naturally, she would feel more at home on a pro-life forum, since her personal views are mirrored there. Feeling pro-life and actually being pro-life are different and can often be divorced, as in this case. Such a woman is somewhat morally pro-life yet politically pro-choice, although such an descriptive addition is not necessary: at the nitty-gritty, she's just pro-choice, as pro-choice refers to stances vis-a-vis the law, not personal dis/like.

|

Tylanas

replied on December 20th, 2007

Especially eHealthy

I'm just going to ignore you. I am attempting to introduce a concept you clearly don't want to even consider. You want to keep the definitions black and white. I don't. We're not going to agree and you're not going to be able to have a conversation on this particular thread in a logical way because I'm asking people to discuss something you are 100% against. Please; I want to have a conversation with people about these four concepts and I can't do that with you on here telling me that my opinions are completely wrong. Opinions can't be wrong or right. Your interpretations of these terms are right for you and you alone. Maybe people agree with you, maybe they don't. I want to see how people feel about my ideas; I do not want people like you telling me I am wrong.

|

Kypros

replied on December 20th, 2007

Experienced User

I'm sorry, but I feel that I've introduced a concept several times on other threads that you don't want to even consider. I'm not telling you your opinions are wrong; I'm telling you your idea that semantics are or should be defined by people's opinions is irrational and incorrect. I'm discussing the meanings of these four concepts; you aren't. You're discussing how pro-choicers past and present have unforgivably and baselessly manipulated the terms to suit their own propaganda. It's not in the slightest a matter of "if that label suits you, then it's fairly right for you, but not for me", since by that logic the art of debating would be killed and it would be pointless telling an anti-choicer that abortion isn't murder, because that, of course wouldn't suit him/her.

I'm not trying to keep these definitions black and white since I have no right to change the definitions at all, which is logical. This is why I base my posts on what the facts are, and the facts are how I have described the four concepts in a post you childlishly refuse to read. I just find that you are showing no attempt to even comprehend the point of semantics and why they exist; they certainly wouldn't exist if concepts were defined individually based on what suits him/her. That's nonsensical and not even worth bringing up in an educated discussion.

|

Darkmoon

replied on December 20th, 2007

Active User, very eHealthy

I've got a couple of questions for you, Kypros. Why are you so obsessed with forcing prochoicers to call themselves by a term they find inaccurate and insulting, and why aren't you making the same constant demands of prolifers? I doubt your intentions.

|

Kypros

replied on December 20th, 2007

Experienced User

You seem to have a totally disingenuous outlook on my whole intentions, and equally haven't conveyed the will to hear me out since the two questions wouldn't have needed to've been asked if you read my previous posts. Firstly, what possible other intentions could I possibly have Confused

? That baffles me; secondly, I'm not obsessed with forcing pro-choicers to call themselves by a term they find inaccurate and insulting. I couldn't give a damn whether they ever used the terms in their lifetime, but if they do, I feel it is only fair if they do so in the correct context, not some ridiculously thought-up fake meaning by pro-choicers who seem to fear being labelled by anything non-euphemistic. I want pro-choicers to recognise and accept that they are inextricably pro-abortionists. It isn't pejorative and anybody who finds pro-abortion offensive must find pro-choice or "being in support of the legal right to abortion" offensive, too; I'm not forcing them to utilise the terms. Nonetheless, I have no qualms with using either pro-choice or pro-abortion and I'm pleased that pro-lifer yodavater has freely made use of anti-choice; thirdly, I've done exactly the same for pro-lifers on various threads, as you would have noticed more than once if you cared to peruse my notes. Check the discussions between yoda and me. I've concentrated more centrally on pro-choicers/pro-abortionists because they, not pro-lifers/anti-choicers, have been the majority respondants to my posts and I'd like to mention the issue, as a pro-choicer, to people whose views I can better conform to.

A couple of questions for you: why do you (ostensibly blindly) follow erroneous definitions that are not rationally or factually backed? Why do you find "being in support of the legal right to choose abortion" (=pro-abortion) offensive and inaccurate? I'm questioning your motives.

|

Darkmoon

replied on December 20th, 2007

Active User, very eHealthy

Kypros wrote:

You seem to have a totally disingenuous outlook on my whole intentions,

Oh, really? Then answer the question. Why aren't you dogging the prolifers of the board who object to the terms "anti choice" and "pro liar" the way you're dogging the prochoicers?

Kypros wrote:

Firstly, what possible other intentions could I possibly have Confused?

Given your fixation on applying a term that is logically inaccurate to the motives and feelings of the majority of prochoicers here, your snotty replies to those who don't agree with you and the number of topics you've derailed to make your demands, your declared intentions lack credibility. Not to mention the fact that I haven't seen you latch onto any of the prolifers the way you have Eirie except to give Yoda a prostate massage with your nose because he agrees with your opinion concerning the use of the term. Honestly I have my doubts that you're really an advocate for abortion rights. You've made a few token comments to prolifers (I suspect for the sake of appearance) but you've directed an awful lot of venom at people you claim to share a cause with, and all because you’re offended that they won’t accept being called what is to them an insult.

Kypros wrote:

I couldn't give a damn whether they ever used the terms in their lifetime, but if they do, I feel it is only fair if they do so in the correct context, not some ridiculously thought-up fake meaning by pro-choicers who seem to fear being labelled by anything non-euphemistic.

All meanings are "thought-up" by someone, including the meaning that you choose to endorse. Jen actually explained it quite nicely in her post above, if you care to read it. The terms aren't mutually exclusive to one another because they represent different stances on the issue. Those in favor of protecting women's right to ALL reproductive choices logically call themselves PROCHOICE because they don't advocate any one decision over the other; instead they leave it up to the woman in question and support her right to that decision. Use of the term PROABORTION implies that only one reproductive choice is supported, which is inaccurate and insulting to some because they are fighting to keep women's choices free, not limited to one outcome.

Likewise many prolifers take offense at being called anti choice because they are focused on preserving the lives of the unborn, rather than the woman’s choices.

Kypros wrote:

I want pro-choicers to recognise and accept that they are inextricably pro-abortionists.

I've never performed an abortion in my life, nor do I intend to. Referring to me or any other choice supporter except for actual doctors who perform abortion as any kind of "abortionist" is about as accurate as calling a member of the Humane Society a veterinarian. While it's flattering that you think we're all talented enough to be surgeons, it's not accurate and I suspect you know that, so I can only conclude that your intention here is to insult. Since you're so fond of dictionary definitions, here's one for you:

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
a·bor·tion·ist /əˈbɔrʃənɪst/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[uh-bawr-shuh-nist] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. a person who performs or induces abortions, esp. illegally.
2. a person who favors or advocates abortion as a right or choice that all women should have: usually intended as an offensive term.
[Origin: 1870–75, Americanism; abortion -ist]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

Kypros wrote:

A couple of questions for you: why do you (ostensibly blindly) follow erroneous definitions that are not rationally or factually backed?

I don't. There's nothing erroneous about the refusal to use a word that does not accurately describe oneself. After all, according to some definitions black people are the "N" word and while one wouldn't be technically wrong to refer to them that way by definition alone, it's certainly not acceptable nor should it have ever been. Homosexual people are by some definitions "people" but again, why should they accept being referred to by a word that was twisted and assigned new meaning by people who hate them? Think about it.

Kypros wrote:

Why do you find "being in support of the legal right to choose abortion" (=pro-abortion) offensive and inaccurate? I'm questioning your motives.

I find nothing offensive about being known as a person who supports the legal right to choose abortion. As I explained above, my umbrage comes from the intent to narrow my stance down to a single choice. I wouldn't personally find "proabortion" offensive if abortion was the only pregnancy outcome I supported, but since I'm also pro-birth and pro-adoption the term is inaccurate to my stance. Ergo, prochoice is the most accurate and logical summary of what I support.

|

Birch

replied on December 20th, 2007

Extremely eHealthy

Ooooh, five stars to this thread!!

|

sed_grep_awk

replied on December 20th, 2007

New User

Re: Pro-choice, Anti-choice, Pro-life And Pro-abortion

Eiri wrote:

OPINIONS ONLY. I will ignore any and ALL dictionary definitions on this topic. I don't care what a dictionary has to say: I care what YOU have to say.

Pro-abortion Someone who actively attempts to persuade pregnant females to have abortions. I picture someone protesting outside a women's health clinic, trying to grab pregnant women--who are happy to be pregnant and have no intention of ending their pregnancies--and coerce them into having abortions. Extreme, yeah, I know, but that's how I see it--kind of like the opposite of the "pro-life" people who protest outside abortion clinics.

Pro-choice This is what I am. As I see it, a truly pro-choice person would NEVER attempt to talk someone else into having an abortion. Rather, we listen attentively and offer support, neutral support, to a woman/girl dealing with an unwanted pregnancy. If she CHOOSES to have an abortion, we might personally not like it (I know I don't--I always wish abortion would just never be necessary), but we'll still support her in her choice. If she chooses to give the baby up for adoption, same thing, we'll support her and try to help her see the good parts of adoption so she'll feel good about her choice. Should she choose to keep her baby, we offer support and reassurance that she can handle being a parent, even if she's afraid or unsure at the moment. Basically, in my opinion, pro-choice comes down to exactly what its name implies.

Pro-life I believe this is usually a misnomer for the people it's applied to. I don't think they're necessarily pro-LIFE, in its truest sense, but are instead anti-choice--but won't call themselves that. From what I've seen, people who call themselves pro-life tend to be against social programs that would make LIVING children happier, healthier, better educated, better fed, etc., and that contradicts the whole concept of being pro-life. So, in my opinion, the term pro-life should be reserved for people--like myself!--who care about the quality of life children have AFTER they're born.

Anti-choice This is what the vast majority of so-called pro-lifers actually are. They are against abortion, sometimes in all situations (even including rape/incest), sometimes only in certain situations (such as abortions done purely for the mother's convenience). They're basically misogynists who think THEY are better prepared to make decisions for other people than the pregnant female themselves. They don't think there should be any choice in the matter--other than their favorite catchphrase, that is: "If you don't want to have a baby, KEEP YOUR LEGS CLOSED!"

So there you have it--my opinions about the four terms.

|

12 3 4 5 >>