Liberals Are Not Pro-Abortion

Published on January 28, 2006 By stevendedalus In Politics

Most of us considerably left of center do not think of ourselves as pro-abortion. Rather, it is up to the woman, and perhaps the man implicated, who must under trying circumstance make the weighty decision to abort. Contrary to the conservative perception, liberals do not encourage abortion, but simply that it is out of the jurisdiction of politics even though some may indeed think of it as a questionable murderous process resting with the individual conscience of the decision-maker[s]. Many liberals do feel that it is rightfully a religious matter for the devoted who should seek religious counsel. Liberals do not publicly frown on those who for whatever reason make the momentous choice.

http://stevendedalus.joeuser.com

Comments (Page 1)

davad70

on Jan 28, 2006

That's the most frustrating thing about the abortion issue for me personally. People I've come across who are "pro-life" can't seem to recognize the diffrence between "pro-abortion" and "pro-choice".

stevendedalus

on Jan 29, 2006

Frustrating and irritating indeed!

bakerstreet

on Jan 29, 2006

That's one way of looking at it. Another way would be that one side wants abortion to be an option, the other doesn't. From that perspective, one wants the practice to exist, the other doesn't, therefore one is anti-abortion, the other isn't.

I understand where you are coming from completely. Someone who wants doctor-assisted suicide might take issue with being called 'pro-suicide'. Someone who is in favor of drug legalization might not like being called 'pro-drug use'. In the end, though, if you want something to be available, you are promoting the ability to do it.

If infants were languishing in orphanages, it might make more sense. In reality, people wait years to adopt an infant in the US. People who are "pro-life" simply want the unborn children in question to have the chance to live. People who think abortion should be legal want mothers to be able to snuff out the lives of unborn children, no questions asked.

Call that what you want, but it will always be pro-abortion to me.

drmiler

on Jan 29, 2006

Me too. As far as I'm concerned pro-choice "is" pro-abortion! See there's one fly in your ointment. "If" it's "truly" pro-choice, where does the babies "choice" come in?

Dr Guy

on Jan 29, 2006

Contrary to the conservative perception, liberals do not encourage abortion,

That is only partially true. Anyone that tries to argue that planned Parenthood is not encouraging abortion has a very difficult task ahead of them as the facts scream louder than any rhetoric.

Draginol

on Jan 29, 2006

Well I'm not liberal but I'm pro-abortion.

Dog under a dusty porch

on Jan 29, 2006

"Anyone that tries to argue that planned Parenthood is not encouraging abortion has a very difficult task ahead of them as the facts scream louder than any rhetoric."

What rhetoric? From your righty lying spinning websites? Give me a break. Besides, have you ever gone to Planned Parenthood yourself? Have you ever personally looked at their family planning program? I doubt it. You're just a lying sack of shill for the rightwing demagogery lying neocons.

Dr Guy

on Jan 29, 2006

What rhetoric? From your righty lying spinning websites? Give me a break. Besides, have you ever gone to Planned Parenthood yourself? Have you ever personally looked at their family planning program? I doubt it. You're just a lying sack of shill for the rightwing demagogery lying neocons.

You would do yourself well to learn how to discuss and debate instead of name calling. You just proved my point. Even tho you will probably never understand or comprehend how. That is your loss. On both counts.

stevendedalus

on Jan 29, 2006

Call that what you want, but it will always be pro-abortion to me.

It's easy to resort to linquistics and faulty reasoning

if you want something to be available, you are promoting the ability to do it.

A woman has every right not to go through the anxiety of manufacturing babies for someone else who probably is oriented to eugenics.

If infants were languishing in orphanages, it might make more sense.

but they are! Precisely because prospective adoptive parents are choosy--they want pedigrees.

'pro-drug use'.

It's available one way or the other. Personally, I'd prefer one of my kids to go to a drug store for a fix than manipulate a deal with sleaze balls. Prohibition got us nowhere.

stevendedalus

on Jan 29, 2006

"If" it's "truly" pro-choice, where does the babies "choice" come i

The mother is sparing the fetus from having to make choices in a crazy world.

That is only partially true. Anyone that tries to argue that planned Parenthood is not encouraging abortion has a very difficult task ahead of them as the facts scream louder than any rhetoric.

As a Catholic you should know that there is conscious planning owing to the rhythm method and inadmissable contraceptives.

stevendedalus

on Jan 29, 2006

You would do yourself well to learn how to discuss and debate instead of name calling.

I agree the name calling is taboo; but the same goes for institutions such as Planned Parenthood.

Well I'm not liberal but I'm pro-abortion.

Yes, I did not intend to make it sound that there were none on the other side. But I think you will agree, as you have stated many times, that it is up to the woman to choose and yet is not one who thinks of herself as being the epitome of "pro-abortion" as though it were some sinister, generic movement .

Deference

on Jan 29, 2006

Rather, it is up to the woman, and perhaps the man implicated, who must under trying circumstance make the weighty decision to abort.

Given some of the rhetoric, i.e.; fetuses are simply masses of cells, the life of one citizen is worth the equal amount of another's desires, etc., I believe there are few 'liberals' that feel there is anything 'weighty' about the choice to abort as their conscience is already cleared by the majority of the rationalizations given to support the idea of a moral choice in the matter. Under the guidance of the Supreme Court's precedence in Roe v. Wade, it is never the man's choice, it's unfortunate you'd even entertain that thought in stating that it would "perhaps [be up to] the man implicated". Not to seem unreasonable; I agree with your choice of words, but in looking at the argument of it being a 'woman's right to control her body' let's understand that the man's view is not ever a matter of relevance nor does he retain the same right a woman does when making the choice to abort or not abort.

Contrary to the conservative perception, liberals do not encourage abortion

There is an interesting stigma attributed to 'liberals' - that, they, themselves, believe abortion is a necessary tool to relieving poor single mothers of an unfortunate, unavoidable circumstance. Somehow, it is thought, confirming a right to an abortion is also a vote for it's use!

In allowing citizens' access to the cookie jar, but at the same time saying that one is not for citizens accessing the cookie jar is dubious character-damning rhetoric allowing uncritical minds abortion proponents uneeded slack.

Liberals do not publicly frown on those who for whatever reason make the momentous choice.

Maybe not, but I don't think that is reflected in today's society. In line with 'liberal' think (I'm using the term loosely - obviously not all who proclaim themselves liberal actually assign themselves to the highly subjective conservative opinion of what is a liberal) is the aggressively progressive woman's movement who possibly attribute more value to the 'modern' woman who rises through a career outside of domestic burdens as opposed to one who lifts them up.

pro-abortion" and "pro-choice

It's simply a way of framing the issue to stifle actual debate about the issue. Republicans may say they are 'pro-tax cuts' leaving the mind to infer that anyone debating against them must be 'anti-tax cuts' allowing them to affectively sweep any fact, question, or intelligent debate aside.

Gideon MacLeish

on Jan 29, 2006

What rhetoric? From your righty lying spinning websites? Give me a break

Actually, I have documented pretty thoroughly the eugenist philosophy of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, and to do it again here would be redundant (if this were my own computer, and the text saved to my own hard drive, I might indulge you, but as it stands, I don't want to spend more of my limited time reinforcing a point I've made and re-made ad nauseum).

That being said, not all leftists would describe themselves as supporters of planned parenthood (although most, in my personal anecdotal experience have been pretty ardent supporters). Therefore, in fairness we must differentiate between the goals of PP (which is not composed entirely of leftists) and the left (which is not composed entirely of PP supporters).

Dr Guy

on Jan 29, 2006

That is only partially true. Anyone that tries to argue that planned Parenthood is not encouraging abortion has a very difficult task ahead of them as the facts scream louder than any rhetoric.

As a Catholic you should know that there is conscious planning owing to the rhythm method and inadmissable contraceptives.

But that does not address the point. And we can continue this over to a religion article, but I dont think that is what you intend.

Dr Guy

on Jan 29, 2006

agree the name calling is taboo; but the same goes for institutions such as Planned Parenthood.

I mentioned them. I did not condemn them. I merely said look into their rhetoric to find where they condemn themselves.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!