Sunday, April 26, 2009


I've spent a great deal of time here explaining the euphemistic nature of the term "pro-choice". The whole question is irrelevant, however. I could say I'm pro-rape, and, when called out on it, clarify that I do not personally agree with rape, but I support the right of a man to rape a woman if he so chooses. I would not impose my personal morality on men; after all, it's his penis. If person A supports the right to rape, and person B supports rape itself, they are going to have largely the same impact on the law: more votes towards the legalization of rape. And both are equally abhorrent positions to hold, or at least the difference is insignificant.


Anonymous said...

Abortions rock

ockraz said...

Although I oppose capital punishment, whenever someone tells me that one cannot be pro-life without being opposed to capital punishment, then I point out that gun ownership and school vouchers to opt out of the public school system are issues of 'choice'. If one holds the pro-life movement to a standard that is not based on abortion, then the same should apply to pro-choicers. Most politicians who oppose abortion favor the death penalty, and they'd be disqualified- but most politicians who support a right to abortion are against vouchers and in favor of gun control- so theirs go too. I feel that everyone knows that the terms refer to the abortion conflict exclusively, and that in that conflict one group finds 'choice' to be the more important value, and the other finds 'life' to be more important. If you want me to call your movement 'pro-choice', then you should respect my movement enough to use their preferred appellation.

Nulono said...

This is why I've pointed out several times that the term "pro-choice" is meaningless.