The labels that have arisen in the battle over abortion are well known: pro-life, pro-choice, pro-abortion, anti-choice, anti-woman, anti-abortion and many more.
What they all have in common is a tilt – with “pro” regarded as more acceptable than “anti,” particularly when it comes to “choice.”
The Associated Press Stylebook is now advising journalists to use “anti-abortion instead of pro-life and abortion rights instead of pro-abortion or pro-choice.”
But now there’s an option for supporters of abortion to completely avoid apparently offensive “pro-life” terminology.
It’s a Google extension that changes any occurrence of the term “pro-life” to “anti-choice” in text on the Web.
“Those who stand against a woman’s right to decide what is best for her own body prop themselves up as righteous saviors using a problematic framework of rhetoric and religion,” the program’s promoters state online.
The left-wing site Think Progress explained the computer program was set up by an anonymous activist who partnered with the National Institute for Reproductive Health Action Fund, the NIRH.
“We thought it was a really interesting and creative idea,” said NIHR President Andrea Miller. “We agreed with her that the language in this discussion really matters.”
Think Progress suggested that many believe the viewpoint on the other side of “pro-life” is “anti-baby.”
“If you state that something is pro-life, then the opposite of that is obviously quite demonizing,” Miller told the website.
A description of the app states the “term ‘pro-life’ is inaccurate in this argument – although it is a powerful tool in the fight against women’s health rights – as it serves to demonize individuals who are pro-choice by suggesting that in their support of a woman’s right to choose what is best for her own life, they also advocate for death in some way.”
“Tired of seeing the fraught term ‘pro-life’ used ubiquitously and incorrectly, we conceived of this extension to shift the language of the discussion towards a more accurate framework. Using the language of pro-choice and anti-choice eliminates the sneaky and damning implications of a model built around ‘pro-life’ versus pro-choice language. Pro-choice advocates are not anti-life, anti-choice advocates seek to eliminate a woman’s right to choose. A conversation built on pro-choice versus anti-choice language is a more accurate one, and is one that does not vilify those who identify as anti-choice any further than their own actions would suggest.”
Those who apply the pro-life label to themselves have a different perspective.
Joseph Meaney at LifeSiteNews wrote about people who “do not self-identify as anti-abortion but rather as pro-life.”
He pointed out that some 40 million unborn children died last year from abortion, far above most other causes, which is why those who self-describe as pro-life focus on abortion.
“How many human beings died by abortion since 1966? Over 2 billion people,” he wrote.
“Abortion is presented above all today as a ‘woman’s issue’ a question of ‘choice’ and even as a ‘human right,'” said Meaney. “This is all clever marketing for the atrocious reality of baby killing. Three are car bumper stickers that read ‘Against abortion? Don’t have one.’ Now fill in the blanks with any other cause. ‘Against the killing of baby seals? Don’t club one’ … The ridiculousness of this statement leaps out.”
Meaney noted that the most commonly used slogan for abortion activists, “pro-choice,” makes it “sound like these people, calmly and dispassionately respect the informed choices that women make.”
“In reality, they are ever more rabidly pushing abortion on many frightened and confused women and girls,” he said.
“Why is it that so-called ‘pro-choicers’ fight tooth and nail against any attempt to inform women of the facts of the medical and psychological risks involved in choosing abortion? Why do ‘Pro-Choice’ organizations oppose mandatory waiting periods that give women a chance to think through their abortion decision?
“How can one simultaneously say they are pro-choice and deny to medical personnel the choice not to participate in abortions? There was the Scottish midwives’ case … in the UK a few years ago. There have been similar problems in Sweden and many other countries,” he said.
Think Progress said politicians who say they are pro-life “are often singularly focused on restricting abortion, and aren’t necessarily working on other policy proposals that could save lives.”
Wrote Meaney: “I find it curious that pro-lifers are almost the only ones who are expected to solve all the world’s ills while other campaigners are not. … Are those animal rights people trying to save the great apes taken to task for not doing more to end whaling?”
Meaney said more is needed that slogans, however.
“Here is a challenge for all of us,” he wrote. “Eighty-three percent of abortive mothers in one survey said that if even one person among their family or friends had offered support for choosing life they would not have gone through with the abortion.”
He continued, “It can be uncomfortable to stand up and be a pro-life witness, but isn’t saving human lives and the spiritual good we can do worth it?”
