When people say they are pro-choice, ask them what they mean by that. Why don’t they finish the sentence?
Pro-choice for education? Careers? Whom to marry? Whether to buy health insurance? Whether to own a gun? Whether to home school your children? Whether to pay for the abortions and/or birth control of others? What size sodas to drink? What to eat for lunch? Those are fine.
Oh, you meant, “Pro-choice to kill an innocent but unwanted human being?” I can’t go for that.
People who favor pro-legalized-abortion are skilled at the name game. If you didn’t know better you’d think they didn’t know how to complete a sentence. They will do anything to avoid the word abortion. It is always, “choice,” “reproductive freedom,” “women’s rights,” etc. And they call us “anti-choice.”
I’d be OK with any of those labels provided that they completed the sentence for a change:
- Anti-choice to crush and dismember an innocent human being
- Pro-choice to kill an innocent yet unwanted human being
- A woman’s right to have her unborn child destroyed (but not a man’s right)
- Pro-reproductive freedom to kill an innocent human being after she has been reproduced, up to and including partial birth abortion (and after, if your last name is Obama) [Never let them get away with using “reproductive freedom” in relation to abortion, as it is a scientific fact that abortions kill human beings that have already been reproduced.]
- and so on.
And do they really want choice, or do they want abortions? Courtesy of Duane, read about the 14 yr. old girl who had to sue her family to prevent them from forcing to kill her child — and their grandchild! Why hasn’t this made front-page news and lit up the pro-“choice” blogs?
A theologically liberal blogger commented on another site about choice:
As to the abortion issue, as ___ raises it, he is exactly right. That’s the whole point of being “pro-choice”. I can’t speak for anyone else, so I’ll just say that, being pro-choice means just that. Gov. Palin and her husband are to be admired for their decision, even after it was revealed the baby would have Down’s, to continue with the pregnancy and add a fifth child at such a late point in their lives. Another couple might have made another choice, and there is nothing inherently wrong with that because I do not live their lives, and cannot make their moral or family choices for them.
As with most pro-legalized-abortion arguments he ignores the obvious: The Palin’s can’t legally choose to destroy the Down Syndrom child once he is outside the womb (at least not yet). So the only question is, “What is the unborn?” Hint: Scientifically speaking, he is a human being. So we shouldn’t give anyone the choice to kill him.
I saw this a while back: Adoption: The choice where no one dies.
Via SUNDAY! Ask Them What They Mean by “Choice” Day – Jill Stanek.