# "Pro-life" and "pro-choice" are both stupid expressions **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 17, 2007, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835 "2007-11-17T15:41:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2007, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/41 "2007-11-18T13:44:35Z")
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers] This pro-choicer would be happy for you to supply some examples, because nothing useful comes to mind. [/QUOTE] Gladly. What about the choice to rape, or pillage, or set fire to a neighbor’s house? I daresay that even the most vehement pro-choice would oppose such choices. What about the choice to torture homosexuals for fun? Or atheists? Or pro-choicers? Can one legitimately defend these actions on the grounds that “It’s my choice!” Or is the right to “choose” insufficient grounds for doing so? Heck, what about the choice to own slaves? Once upon a time, people argued strenuously for the right to exercise this choice. A nation was divided over this issue, so there was considerable disagreement in this regard. Was the right to own slaves defensible on the grounds of free choice? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2007, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/42 "2007-11-18T15:00:10Z")
[QUOTE=JThunder] Then why not extend that same courtesy to the pro-life camp? They coined that phrase to mean protection of life in general, barring certain rare and unusual circumstances (e.g. abortion to save a mother’s life, and for some, capital punishment). In fact, they believe that life should be protected in the vast majority of circumstances. I daresay that even pro-choicers can come up with a longer list of situations wherein “choice” is not necessarily a good thing. [/QUOTE] This is absolutely untrue. I have met zero pro-lifers who are devout Jainists. I don’t even think I’ve ever met a vegan pro-lifers. Pacifist pro-lifers are a rare breed, but war itself isn’t exactly a rarity in our society. Pro-lifers are opposed to the taking of innocent, genetically distinct human life, but that’s very different from advocating the “protection of life in general.” And I have no problem with that, since the term is both idiomatic and well-understood. But, like pro-choice, it does not withstand a literal interpretation whatsoever. Daniel ETA: Just to be absolutely clear, the taking of life with antibiotics, pesticides, or slaughterhouses is nothing like a rare or unusual circumstance. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2007, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/43 "2007-11-18T15:53:06Z")
[QUOTE=Polerius] You knock someone out, you put them on a spaceship and you both go to Mars. [/QUOTE] Your well crafted what-if depends on the fetus being analogous to a grown human being. In my world view, a much closer analogy would begin with: You buy a steak and put it on a spaceship and you both go to Mars… (Not that I’m advocating cannibalism, just so’s we’re crystal clear. But an early term zygote or embryo has much more in common with a porterhouse than a person.) ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2007, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/44 "2007-11-18T17:18:02Z")
[QUOTE=JThunder] Gladly. What about the choice to rape, or pillage, or set fire to a neighbor’s house? I daresay that even the most vehement pro-choice would oppose such choices. What about the choice to torture homosexuals for fun? Or atheists? Or pro-choicers? Can one legitimately defend these actions on the grounds that “It’s my choice!” Or is the right to “choose” insufficient grounds for doing so? Heck, what about the choice to own slaves? Once upon a time, people argued strenuously for the right to exercise this choice. A nation was divided over this issue, so there was considerable disagreement in this regard. Was the right to own slaves defensible on the grounds of free choice? [/QUOTE] Well, if the neighbor built a house in your uterus, go ahead. And if a homosexual or atheist or pro-choicer took up residence in one’s uterus, I’d say torturing or enslaving or raping them is okey-dokey, too, though a simple surgical procedure to expel them is probably the better approach. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2007, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/45 "2007-11-18T17:20:49Z")
[QUOTE=WhyNot] Your well crafted what-if depends on the fetus being analogous to a grown human being. In my world view, a much closer analogy would begin with: You buy a steak and put it on a spaceship and you both go to Mars… (Not that I’m advocating cannibalism, just so’s we’re crystal clear. But an early term zygote or embryo has much more in common with a porterhouse than a person.) [/QUOTE] Then the analogy is meaningless to you. It was directed to people who concede that a fetus could have rights, but not a right that intrudes on the mother’s right to use her body only specifically as she prefers. If a fetus is equivalent to a steak for you (and I understand the sense you mean it), then the analogy isn’t apropos. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2007, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/46 "2007-11-18T17:24:45Z")
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers] Well, if the neighbor built a house in your uterus, go ahead. And if a homosexual or atheist or pro-choicer took up residence in one’s uterus, I’d say torturing or enslaving or raping them is okey-dokey, too, though a simple surgical procedure to expel them is probably the better approach. [/QUOTE] I’m sure those distinctions aren’t lost on JThunder. But within the semantical debate that is the essence of this thread, “pro-choice” is as ambiguous as “pro-life.” That’s the point. If one asserts, “well, you know what choice we refer to,” another could just as easily say, “you understand which life we’re referring to.” Again, if one takes exception with the ambiguity of one, then it seems logical one would find the same fault with the other. Not surprisingly, that doesn’t seem to be the case, not consistently on either side. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2007, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/47 "2007-11-18T17:39:52Z")
[QUOTE=Stratocaster] I’m sure those distinctions aren’t lost on JThunder. But within the semantical debate that is the essence of this thread, “pro-choice” is as ambiguous as “pro-life.” That’s the point. If one asserts, “well, you know what choice we refer to,” another could just as easily say, “you understand which life we’re referring to.” Again, if one takes exception with the ambiguity of one, then it seems logical one would find the same fault with the other. [/QUOTE] I totally agree. I believe that it’s silly to interpret either position literally, and believe that both terms work. I’ll also take a position that complements **Shodan’s** : while I agree that both sides are phrasing their position in the most positive terms, I think that’s hunky dory. Both sides are naming themselves according to what they believe is the central issue, and so the names are descriptive in that respect. Pro-choicers believe that the central issue is choice (thus the irrelevant bumper sticker “Against abortion? Don’t have one,” which could be parodied by, “Against rape? Don’t commit one.”) Pro-lifers believe that the central issue is life (thus the irrelevant bumper sticker “Abortion stops a beating heart,” which could be parodied by, “Bacon stops a beating heart.”) Beyond their idiomatic meanings, the terms identify what principles are considered most relevant by the folks who hold the position. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2007, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/48 "2007-11-18T17:40:28Z")
[QUOTE=Stratocaster] I’m sure those distinctions aren’t lost on JThunder. But within the semantical debate that is the essence of this thread, “pro-choice” is as ambiguous as “pro-life.” That’s the point. If one asserts, “well, you know what choice we refer to,” another could just as easily say, “you understand which life we’re referring to.” [/quote] Well. the only reason I responded as I did originally was because of JThunder’s: > [@](#): > > They coined that phrase to mean protection of life in general, barring certain rare and unusual circumstances (e.g. abortion to save a mother’s life, and for some, capital punishment). In fact, they believe that life should be protected in the vast majority of circumstances. If he’d said “Pro-life is the label we use to identify our anti-abortion efforts”… fine. Expanding that to other spheres, though, raises the question of what efforts not related to abortion, if any, are being pursued by these organizations. I would expect someone who is pro-life “in general” to be interested in preserving human life whenever possible, and expanding health insurance to the poor seems to me along these lines and more feasible, legally and economically, than banning abortion. Voting for Hillary Clinton would be a big step in this direction, I guess. Instead of clarifying, though, he chose to throw back wacky hypotheticals like choosing to enslave your neighbor’s homosexual house. Anyway, I’m fine with “pro life” describing policies determined to ban abortion and “pro choice” describing policies to _not_ ban abortion. Just don’t try to inflate the significance of either beyond these limited goals. ---
**Author:** ![lowbrass](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/dc4da7/32.png) [@lowbrass](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lowbrass)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2007, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/49 "2007-11-18T20:33:09Z")
[QUOTE=JThunder] Irrelevant. You said that “choice” means “the choice as to whether or not to have an abortion.” By the same token, “life” in the term"pro-life" means life in the majority of situations. [/quote] But I thought I explained that it’s NOT the “same token”. As I said, the flip sides of this “token” are not mirror-images of each other. By what reasoning do you proclaim this fact “irrelevant”? > [@](#): > > It does allow for exceptions to the rule, just as the term “pro-choice” meant to encompass all choices. Why should pro-choicers get the benefit of magnamity while holding pro-lifers to a narrower and more stringent standard? Because their goal is narrower. As an analogy, let’s say I believe in freedom of speech, and as such, believe that Neo-Nazis and KKK members have the right to speak in public. I believe this because I believe in a right that encompasses these two things, even though I disagree with them. Now, you could say that I’m “pro-KKK” or “pro-Nazi”, but that would be a very severe distortion of my beliefs. But let’s say someone else is in favor of banning all Neo-Nazis from speaking in public. It is NOT a distortion to say that such a person is “anti-Nazi”. > [@](#): > > You said, “This isn’t sophistry or semantics, it’s a very real point that those who coined the phrase were trying to make.” Pro-lifers use their term to make a very real point as well, yet they apparently get grief for doing so. Heck, I’d argue that the use of their term is _more_ accurate; after all, exceptions to the pro-life rule are rare, whereas pro-choicers are only defending one _particular_ choice. I haven’t given them any “grief”. If you read back, I actually said I agree with their decision to use that term, as it undoubtedly helps their cause. I just find it less accurate than “pro-choice”. I don’t think the number of exceptions is really the point here. The point is that on the one side, the narrower goal (performing abortions) is not _desired_, but rather is a necessary consequence of achieving the larger goal (freedom of choice and right to privacy), but on the other side, the narrower goal (banning abortions) _is_ desired, and therefore it is accurate to describe it as a primary goal. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2007, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/50 "2007-11-19T00:10:21Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] Pro-lifers believe that the central issue is life (thus the irrelevant bumper sticker “Abortion stops a beating heart,” which could be parodied by, “Bacon stops a beating heart.”) Beyond their idiomatic meanings, the terms identify what principles are considered most relevant by the folks who hold the position. [/QUOTE] But that is **not** the central concern of the “pro-life” movement. They are generally the same people that oppose birth control and sex education - which would lower abortions. They show no concern for the welfare of the mother; if she dies inchildbirth and the baby dies too or is abandoned, that’s fine. If the kid dies after it’s born they don’t care. The great majority of the “pro-life” movement have no concern for life; their goal is to torment and oppress women. Calling themselves “pro-life” is dishonest. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2007, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/51 "2007-11-19T00:55:35Z")
[QUOTE=Der Trihs] But that is **not** the central concern of the “pro-life” movement. They are generally the same people that oppose birth control and sex education - which would lower abortions. They show no concern for the welfare of the mother; if she dies inchildbirth and the baby dies too or is abandoned, that’s fine. If the kid dies after it’s born they don’t care. [/QUOTE] Yes, yes, yes, and feminism encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians. I have a Mr. Robertson who’d like to have a sit-down with you. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2007, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/52 "2007-11-19T01:32:00Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] Yes, yes, yes, and feminism encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians. [/QUOTE] False equivalency. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2007, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/53 "2007-11-19T01:47:24Z")
[QUOTE=Der Trihs] False equivalency. [/QUOTE] [Nuh uh.](http://www.pregnancysupport.org/) Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2007, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/54 "2007-11-19T01:52:27Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] [Nuh uh.](http://www.pregnancysupport.org/) [/QUOTE] That’s some Christian, and therefore untrustworthy at best site. And I fail to see the point in linking to them; what are you trying to prove ? If there’s some anti-feminist rant on there, so what ? A hatred towards women has always been a major theme of the Christian religion, whether those women are feminists or not. ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2007, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/55 "2007-11-19T05:19:33Z")
[QUOTE=WhyNot] Your well crafted what-if depends on the fetus being analogous to a grown human being. [/QUOTE] Did you not notice that I said “Of course, a lot of people say a fetus is not a person, and I think that is the crux of the issue, but you [Annie-Xmas] specifically stated that even if it were a person, it wouldn’t make a difference” The analogy was meant to address the hypothetical of a fetus being a “full” human. > [@](#): > > In my world view, a much closer analogy would begin with: > > You buy a steak and put it on a spaceship and you both go to Mars… Besides my point above, your analogy fails because a steak can never turn into a cow. ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2007, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/56 "2007-11-19T13:18:24Z")
It always annoys me when abortion is compared to rape. If a man uses a woman’s reproductive organs against her will, it’s rape. If a fetus uses a woman’s reproductive organs against her will, shouldn’t that also be considered rape? Story time: We set up a fund for a woman who had little money and who lost her three year old son to a paternal murder/suicide. NOT ONE “PRO-LIFE” ORGANIZATION SO MUCH AS SENT A CARD! However, Planned Parenthood did send a very generous check for $5,000 and First Lady Hillary Clinton sent a card. ETA: I’ll stop using the term “anti-abortion” when the “anti-aborftion” crowd stops using the term “pro-abortion.” ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2007, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/57 "2007-11-19T13:53:46Z")
[QUOTE=Polerius] You knock someone out, you put them on a spaceship and you both go to Mars. While there, you have enough oxygen and food to keep both of you alive, but it would be a hassle to keep him alive, since you want to roam around and explore the planet, and you can’t since you have to stick around to feed him and make sure he gets enough oxygen. A spaceship will come to Mars to pick the guy up in nine months, at which time, you will be free to roam the planet and do as you please. Forget the legal requirements, do you think you have a moral obligation to help a person that you took, against their will, into an environment where they can’t live without you? Of course, a lot of people say a fetus is not a person, and I think that is the crux of the issue, but you specifically stated that even if it were a person, it wouldn’t make a difference. [/QUOTE] Why am I required to feed and give a grown person oxygen? How is that experience causing MY body to change in anyway that is similar to pregnancy? If I had to hook myself up to him and support his life services for nine months, I would not. A woman who gives birth is “free” to go back to her former life? Even if she gives the child up for adoption, I doubt it. ---
**Author:** ![Charger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/df788c/32.png) [@Charger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Charger)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2007, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/58 "2007-11-19T14:37:11Z")
Both terms are emotionally charged, trying to appeal to people while pissing off the opponents. [QUOTE=Annie-Xmas] I cause an accident that ruins both your kidneys. Without a new kidney you will die. I am a perfect match to donate a kidney to you. No court in the country can make me give you a kidney to save your life. [/QUOTE] My take on the subject is that the “choice” was made when the pregnancy was _initiated_ (except in cases of rape, in which case, abort away). People don’t _accidentally_ have sex, and should have the ounce of responsibility required to take precautions if they don’t want pregnancy to result. The benefit to abortion, of course, is that the percent of the population who say, “Oh no! No one told me sex caused _BABIES_” would not be reproducing. If abortions were outlawed (with exceptions in cases of rape–legal nightmare, I know), then people would be forced to make more careful _choices_ in their pregnancy-initiating activities. So, I would do away with the term “pro-life” and referring to fetuses as babies and just call it “pro-responsibility” and the opponents would be “bail-out-after-making-the-choice-ers.” And I’m sure that will never catch on. ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2007, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/59 "2007-11-19T14:44:32Z")
[QUOTE=Charger] My take on the subject is that the “choice” was made when the pregnancy was _initiated_ (except in cases of rape, in which case, abort away). People don’t _accidentally_ have sex, and should have the ounce of responsibility required to take precautions if they don’t want pregnancy to result. The benefit to abortion, of course, is that the percent of the population who say, “Oh no! No one told me sex caused _BABIES_” would not be reproducing. If abortions were outlawed (with exceptions in cases of rape–legal nightmare, I know), then people would be forced to make more careful _choices_ in their pregnancy-initiating activities. So, I would do away with the term “pro-life” and referring to fetuses as babies and just call it “pro-responsibility” and the opponents would be “bail-out-after-making-the-choice-ers.” And I’m sure that will never catch on. [/QUOTE] What method of birth control is 100% effective with no side effects to the woman’s body or the enjoyment of sex, and does not sometimes cause abortions by causing the conceived egg not to implant? Should woman who can prove they used birth control and it failed be allowed to have abortions while woman who use abortion for birth control (and I’ve only met one in 50 years) be denied abortions? Maybe any woman who seeks an abortion should be kidnapped and forced to stay in bed handcuffed and be fed the perfect intravenous diet until she gives birth, then the baby will be taken away from her because only an unfit mother would want an abortion. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2007, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835/60 "2007-11-19T20:18:21Z")
[QUOTE=Charger] My take on the subject is that the “choice” was made when the pregnancy was _initiated_ (except in cases of rape, in which case, abort away). People don’t _accidentally_ have sex, and should have the ounce of responsibility required to take precautions if they don’t want pregnancy to result. The benefit to abortion, of course, is that the percent of the population who say, “Oh no! No one told me sex caused _BABIES_” would not be reproducing. If abortions were outlawed (with exceptions in cases of rape–legal nightmare, I know), then people would be forced to make more careful _choices_ in their pregnancy-initiating activities. So, I would do away with the term “pro-life” and referring to fetuses as babies and just call it “pro-responsibility” and the opponents would be “bail-out-after-making-the-choice-ers.” And I’m sure that will never catch on. [/QUOTE] This whole tack implies that it is impossible to change your mind, or have your circumstances change in unforeseen ways. Neither of those is true, and abortion and awareness of it as an option mean you don’t get punished (and it is a punishment) for your choices out of all proportion to the actual choice. In other words, why are you discounting abortion as a responsible choice? It seems very responsible to me (but then I see it as a valid form of contraception). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-life-and-pro-choice-are-both-stupid-expressions/426835.md?page=4)