Welcome to Gaia! ::

Being pro-life, I feel the same way about that term and have had it directed at me a lot of times. I feel the same way about the term anti-life. I don't use it with anyone unless they insist on calling me anti-choice, and I try not to do it even then.

I understand the feeling, the need to demonize the other side, but I think that it displays a certain insecurity to insist on making the other person seem like the bad guy, to refuse to acknowledge that your opponent isn't a bad person but an equal trying to do what he or she feels is right. Now I tend to pity those people as much as I get angry with them; it's prejudice that doesn't stem from need.

When someone who is pro-life insists on using anti-life, I feel the same anger, and the same pity. It's a discredit to your own position to hurl insults, to completely ignore the people behind the screens, the motivations behind their beliefs. People who are pro-choice (in general) don't relish taking lives, they don't think people deserve to die on a whim, they believe that bodily integrity outranks the right to life. People who are pro-life (again, in general) don't like taking choices away from people, they don't like limiting people in what they do with their body, but they belief the right to life outranks bodily integrity. There are exceptions to these general rules on both sides, but to pretend that one side likes killing, or the other side likes taking away freedom, is a negative reflection on the individual because it betrays fear that if the other person isn't the "bad guy," if the other person isn't acting out of selfishness, that you may possibly be wrong.

People who are secure in their stance despite the fact that there is a grey area don't need to use the terms "Anti-choice," and "Anti-life," because they know that it's not true. They can face an opponent and know, "They have a point, but I do too, and just because they have a point does not mean I am wrong."

Sorry, that rambled a bit sweatdrop

What she said. Always beatign me to the punch these days eh Lymey?

Sadly, this sort of thing dosnt even look good on paper XP

Except that you are "Anti-life" when it comes to the fetus's right to live. You say, "Oh it's okay if it lives, if the woman chooses." Similarly, we say, "Oh it's okay if she chooses what to do about the fetus, if the fetus lives."

You say about pro-choicers, "they're not 'against' foetus, embryos, or babies," to illustrate how they're not anti-life, yet maintain that anti-choice is more accurate. Does that mean that you think pro-lifers are against any choices women make? Do you think we want to control women entirely? You seem to. Otherwise, you wouldn't use that to point out how you're not against them living, but in one situation, it's acceptable to suspend that right. Likewise, we aren't against women choosing, but in one situation, it's acceptable to suspend that right. So tell me, how is it that we are against women choosing any more than you are against fetuses living, when you are against fetuses living in ONE situation, and similarly, we are against women choosing in ONE situation?

You see abortion as a necessary thing that kills millions of humans each year. It is a necessary thing to prevent women losing bodily integrity.
We see making abortion illegal as a necessary thing that takes away one choice from millions of women a year. It is a necessary thing to prevent children losing lives.

There is no room to say it is more accurate to say "anti-choice." Unless it's not true that millions of humans a year die from abortion and you want this to be allowed, then no, you have no room to say that you cannot be labeled as anti-life with the same sort of reasoning used to label us anti-choice.

You're not going to get flamed, but I'm guessing I'm not the only one who's going to point out to you how you are as anti-life as I am anti-choice. You're right, it's better not to use either term because neither is accurate, but they're both equally inaccurate.

I don't think that Pro-Lifers could be called "anti-choice" though I don't really find the term "anti-abortion" objectionable (though "pro-abortion" doesn't apply to Pro-Choicers, since some would never personally get an abortion - "pro-legal-abortion" works though, I feel). Being against one single instance of a choice doesn't make one against all choices, which is what "anti-choice" implies. Pro-Lifers are just as much "anti-choice" as Pro-Choicers are "anti-life", which is to say really not at all.

I feel that the two "pro" terms are the most respectful (if not, really, the most accurate - since of course all people are for both life and choices, in most instances). And I sincerely think that people who use the term "anti-choice" to refer to Pro-Lifers do so out of disrespect, and mean to demean and insult Pro-Lifers.

See, this is why you need a stupid ******** like me to come in and clean up shop. Because we're not ******** anti-choice. In fact, I LOVE CHOICE! You have a CHOICE to have sex, you have a CHOICE to not use protection, you have a CHOICE to ignore the risks involved and ******** ANYWAY. I'm not against taking away women's choice...until it impedes the life of a helpless, defenseless child who had no say in the matter and will have to pay the price for mommy's irresponsibility.

Had that been me, I'd have called them murderous, pro-abortion assholes. If we're anti-good, then so are they. I'm sorry I'm not as nice and civil as the rest of you. I try, but it's hard.

Word to the wise: I catch s**t for this, but this has true almost without exception. When someone backhandedly insults you, they know what they're doing. They're telling you to "******** off" without actually saying it. So they want to get you as pissed off as they can. It's pulling punches, basically. So what do you do? You say exactly how you feel. "But --" No, just say exactly what you feel. Why? Because they weren't listening to you anyway. They weren't considering your views or feelings anyway. If you know you're trying to be decent and civil and people are still saying little things about your character, your integrity, your intellect --- lets ought to let you know they stopped caring about your opinion a long time ago. That's the unspoken dynamic in this entire debate. You can tell by the differences in the Guilds. Pro-Choice advocates go into the debate thinking we're evil; Pro-life advocates go into the debate thinking they're wrong. Know how I know? Pro-life advocates spend a fair amount of time debating irrelevance ("sex doesn't always lead to pregnancy"), emotional appeals ("but what if I don't want to ever have kids, does that mean I should never have sex?"), emotional ploys ("I guess you just want women disallowed from having control over their own bodies!"), and blatant attacks on our character ("anti-woman" "misogynist"). The point is, when you're in a debate, it's not your responsibility to be the bigger person just so your opposition can feel better about letting their emotions steer their judgment and go off on tangents and make you the bad guy. You're not their parent. You're not their social worker. You have a point to make, too. If they're interested in name calling because that's all they care to understand, well, give it to them. I promise you aren't winning any points by being civil with people like that.