Pro-abortion Or Pro-choice

[KnightofChrist]

Again dialog is wonderful and great but a person who is pro-choice is morally depraved and fallen, they will have to be told at some time the truth that pro-choice is pro-abortion/death or anti-life, and pro-life is pro-life.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1625687' date='Aug 12 2008, 08:30 PM']I agree. I didnt change my position, I was just acknowledging his point.

I think really all I could say about my position in response is that if our opponents are to be called pro-abortion, then we ought to rightly be called anti-choice. But then we would have a discrepancy over words, and not be able to move past our terms for each other.[/quote]
The fact is that those who call themselves "pro-choice" ARE pro-abortion (or, specifically, for legalized abortion).
Pro-lifers ARE NOT against legitimate choice - we just realize that killing a baby is NOT a legitimate choice.

[quote]We do have the right argument, because we're arguing for truth. It is of my opinion that the way we can most effectively and fruitfully motion that argument to those that disagree with us without getting caught up in the specific words that we use, that way is the best way to use. We are trying to convey ideas, not words. Let's move those ideas in the best way possible.[/quote]
The truth is that words convey ideas (or at least they should).
If we call those who are for legalized abortion "pro-choice, " this implies that killing a baby is a legitimate choice, which it is not.
Words should convey truth.

[Winchester]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1618364' date='Aug 5 2008, 04:43 PM']I would be open to discussing the evidence for when human life begins if something other than "God said so" was offered and the terms "baby killer" and anything related weren't being thrown around. That's not dialogue, that's name calling.[/quote]
And what kind words would you have for those who advocate slavery of black people?

Or the killing of Jews?

I am certain there were many otherwise generous and kind people who were for slavery.

[KnightofChrist]

I'm sorry to say this... but it really seems that the fetus is the new age n****r in that the word fetus or mass of cells is used like the n word is used. The same arguments are made now against the humanism of the Fetus as was made against the black man.

Edited August 13, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[Didymus]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1625798' date='Aug 12 2008, 10:48 PM']I'm sorry to say this... but it really seems that the fetus is the new age n****r in that the word fetus or mass of cells is used like the n word is used. The same arguments are made now against the humanism of the Fetus as was made against the black man.[/quote]

that's really absurd. So in 20-30 years, maybe only fetuses could refer to themselves as 'fetuses' but we born folks couldn't refer to them as 'fetuses.'

I get the point, but I don't understand why that word has to be used.

[Didymus]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1625776' date='Aug 12 2008, 10:32 PM']The fact is that those who call themselves "pro-choice" ARE pro-abortion (or, specifically, for legalized abortion).
Pro-lifers ARE NOT against legitimate choice - we just realize that killing a baby is NOT a legitimate choice.


The truth is that words convey ideas (or at least they should).
If we call those who are for legalized abortion "pro-choice, " this implies that killing a baby is a legitimate choice, which it is not.
Words should convey truth.[/quote]

but here you change the term. The word 'legitimate' never appears in our opponents' description of us. "Anti-choice" is what they call us. It's not inaccurate. We are against the choice to kill an unborn child. Therefore we are anti-choice, and I don't like being called that. I doubt you do either.

Words [i]should[/i] convey ideas. But when those ideas are washed away or diluted by the words that cause emotions to flare (pro-abort, anti-choice,) then reason does not rule the argument and we do not win, because our argument is built on reason.

Words should convey truth, but they don't always do. In fact they most of the time fall short, as they are only means. They are the means by which we attempt to communicate truth.

Edited August 13, 2008 by Didymus

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1625807' date='Aug 12 2008, 09:55 PM']that's really absurd. So in 20-30 years, maybe only fetuses could refer to themselves as 'fetuses' but we born folks couldn't refer to them as 'fetuses.'

I get the point, but I don't understand why that word has to be used.[/quote]

It is not absurd. The point is both words are used the same way, in a very derogatory hate filled manner. Both words are used to dehumanize the person hood of a human being.

[Didymus]

how is it hate-filled to call a preborn human being what it is? It is a fetus. A human fetus, but a fetus nonetheless.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1625969' date='Aug 13 2008, 08:22 AM']how is it hate-filled to call a preborn human being what it is? It is a fetus. A human fetus, but a fetus nonetheless.[/quote]

The N word was also a good word before it was grossly misused by racist. Pro-abortionist also grossly misuse the word fetus they do not use the word as a term of personhood but of a lower life form, or a nothing, non-human mass of cells.

Edited August 13, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[Didymus]

But "fetus" is not just a 'good word.' It's neutral. It refers to a stage of mammalian life. The human fetus is a human at the stage of fetus. Why do we care what they might use it to mean? Let's use it in the usage it is defined by. It is a medical/biological term. It will always be.

When we are fighting for the rights of the unborn, we are fighting for the rights of fetuses. Is this not what you believe?

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1626100' date='Aug 13 2008, 12:05 PM']But "fetus" is not just a 'good word.' It's neutral. It refers to a stage of mammalian life. The human fetus is a human at the stage of fetus. Why do we care what they might use it to mean? Let's use it in the usage it is defined by. It is a medical/biological term. It will always be.

When we are fighting for the rights of the unborn, we are fighting for the rights of fetuses. Is this not what you believe?[/quote]

I know what fetus really means, the point is my friend it is used by the pro-abortionist to dehumanize the child within the womb, like the n word was and is used by racist to dehumanize blacks. That is the point that the words are grossly misused by those that hate.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1625817' date='Aug 12 2008, 10:00 PM']but here you change the term. The word 'legitimate' never appears in our opponents' description of us. "Anti-choice" is what they call us. It's not inaccurate. We are against the choice to kill an unborn child. Therefore we are anti-choice, and I don't like being called that. I doubt you do either.

Words [i]should[/i] convey ideas. But when those ideas are washed away or diluted by the words that cause emotions to flare (pro-abort, anti-choice,) then reason does not rule the argument and we do not win, because our argument is built on reason.

Words should convey truth, but they don't always do. In fact they most of the time fall short, as they are only means. They are the means by which we attempt to communicate truth.[/quote]
As I've said before, the issue at hand is abortion, not "choice." "Pro-choicers" are not for "choice" as a general principle, but are specifically for the "choice" to kill a baby. To use the bumper-sticker slogan, "It's a child, not a choice."
The debate is about abortion, not choice, and language should reflect that to be truthful.
Once cannot use deceitful words to convey truth.

Let me ask you this:
Would you find using the term "pro-choice" acceptable if people were using it to argue for legalizing rape, slavery, or killing Jews?

[Didymus]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1626440' date='Aug 13 2008, 09:41 PM']As I've said before, the issue at hand is abortion, not "choice." "Pro-choicers" are not for "choice" as a general principle, but are specifically for the "choice" to kill a baby. To use the bumper-sticker slogan, "It's a child, not a choice."
The debate is about abortion, not choice, and language should reflect that to be truthful.
Once cannot use deceitful words to convey truth.

Let me ask you this:
Would you find using the term "pro-choice" acceptable if people were using it to argue for legalizing rape, slavery, or killing Jews?[/quote]

I agree that the debate is about abortion, but I believe the [i]issue[/i] is about unwanted pregnancies. There's good ways of going about solving the issue, and there's bad ways.

I would not find it acceptable to use the term 'pro-choice' when regarding stances on the issues of rape, slavery, or killing anyone, but I believe that this issue is slightly different. Just like rape and slavery are slightly different. Their both bad, but in different ways, and require different processes in order to end the injustices.

Edited August 19, 2008 by Didymus

[Socrates]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1631884' date='Aug 19 2008, 03:35 PM']I agree that the debate is about abortion, but I believe the [i]issue[/i] is about unwanted pregnancies. There's good ways of going about solving the issue, and there's bad ways.[/quote]
The issue is the life of the unborn child which is the "unwanted pregnancy" and whether it should be legal to take the life of that child. [i]That[/i] is the issue at the core of the abortion debate, and anything else is dancing around the real issue.

If people don't want a pregnancy, they should have made the choice not to have sex. But that's not what the legal issue is: it's about the legality of deliberately taking the life of an unborn child.


[quote]I would not find it acceptable to use the term 'pro-choice' when regarding stances on the issues of rape, slavery, or killing anyone, but I believe that this issue is slightly different. Just like rape and slavery are slightly different. Their both bad, but in different ways, and require different processes in order to end the injustices.[/quote]
[i]Why[/i] would you "not find it acceptable" to use the term with those issues?
Just saying that they're "slightly different" doesn't answer anything.
(And abortion does fall under the category of "killing anyone," btw.)

These are all horrible and immoral acts committed against another human being. If you would be offended by the term "pro-choice" being used to defend legalization of rape or slavery, maybe you can see why some of us are opposed to using it with regards to abortion. One can just as validly use the vague term of "choice" to justify legalizing absolutely anything.
(And in the case of slavery, such justification historically is not purely hypothetical. Plenty of people claimed to be personally opposed to slavery, yet did not want it to be prohibited to others.)
The only difference, is that slavery, rape, and racial killings are not acceptable by politically-correct standards, while abortion is.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1625787' date='Aug 12 2008, 10:40 PM']And what kind words would you have for those who advocate slavery of black people?

Or the killing of Jews?

I am certain there were many otherwise generous and kind people who were for slavery.[/quote]


The Human Personhood of a black or Jewish man is not a religious stipulation and can be scientifically demonstrated. The idea that two cells enjoy personhood and ought to be treated as a fully developed and self aware human being is.