Why do people assume that "Pro-choice" means "Pro-abortion"?

Question

That's the main confusion most "pro life" people make. Being pro-choice does not mean that I am pro-abortion. It means I am for the rights of the people. Nobody is for abortion. Nobody wants it to happen. The facts are though, if you allow the government to strip you of your rights, no matter what they are, you will never get them back. And it makes it easier for them to take away more and more rights. I am pro-choice because the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution gives a woman the right to decide what she will and will not do with her body.
So I am pro-constitution, and pro-peoples rights, and pro-choice. Besides, no matter how you feel, in the end it's none of your business what a woman does choose to do with her body. If if offends you, then don't do it. If you choose to teach this to your children, right on. But if you want to take away more of my rights, well, you know what you can do with that bill. Do you assume that pro-choice means pro-abortion?

there you go,
"even Jesus gave people a choice, to believe in him, or not believe in him". Well put.

This is great, the baseless religious sqwakers are well represented tonight, the one down there that can't spell,form proper sentences or use proper grammar. He can't provide a good back argument, so he tries to link abortions to breast cancer, HPV, and get this VERVICAL cancer. Roll another one! And the other guy down there says if we all became pro-choice we would just stop having kids. WHAT? WHO SAID THAT? Pro-choice people don't have kids? Sorry kids, I have to abort you, late term, because I can't be both pro-choice, and have children. Sorry, go ask you mom first.

Answer 1

What the forced-gestation crowd need to understand is that we ALL want fewer unwanted pregnancies in the first place. That means education and easier access to contraceptives. The whole abstinence education and virginity pledge stuff leads to MORE accidental pregnancies and spreading of STDs because when these kids decide to have sex, they haven't been taught how to practice SAFE sex.

Answer 2

I suppose as is the case of Planned Parenthood the choice offered is rather tilted... abortion.. not adoption... adfter all they make hundreds of millions a year on abortion and contraceptives and adoption might be in the childs interest but does it help the cash flow? its tougher and the quick fix of abortion tends to prevail

generally speaking pro-choice people assign no legal right or status to an unborn child

unborn women and unborn men need equal rights do they not, in a pro-choice view the rights of the most vulnerable and inoocent helpless citizens are voided and they are cast aside.. not unlike the dred scot case in fact when a group of people were declared legal nithings

sadly, women having an abortion risk higher breast cancer due to the opportunistic nature of the undifferentiated stem cells and the younger the women the larer the risk. It is nto cleaqr in this case the pro feminism didnt lose sight of what is in the medical best interest and safety of women and children take you pick. In the case of HPV and vervical cancer they were fairly silent until only very very recently and did tno speak up either.

Answer 3

I believe government should protect the babies, who have no choice of their own. I am pro-choice and pro-life on behalf of the BABIES. If a women gets pregnant through willful sex (as opposed to being raped), should she not be held responsible? Is the problem best solved by allowing her to kill an unborn child? What if the father wants the child? Or the grandparents?

I think a pregnant woman, rather than kill a human being she created. should have the baby and give it up for adoption. If it inconveniences her for 9 months, so be it - that is where the responsibility for her action lies. In the end she is free to walk away without the child, the life of the baby is saved, and a happy waiting couple gets to adopt it.

If government says everyone who gets pregnant can slaughter their babies, that is not "given a woman a right over her body." That is giving her the right to avoid responsibility for how she already DID choose to use her body (sex and getting pregnant) and then allowing her to fix her mistake by killing somebody. That points to a very sick government.

Answer 4

People who are Pro-Choice must be Pro-Abortion. To have a choice you are saying it ok to have a abortion for what ever reason. (without limits). In my opinion the government help puts limits on how far this issue should go. Just thinks if everybody decide to become Pro-Choice and stop having kids, we won't have anybody left on the planet, or some mother comes in to the abortion clinic and decide to have a abortion at 8 and half months (late-term abortion), this is why the government steps in to put limits on certain issue and i am ok with this. Because we have some crazy people out there, sad to say this but this is our world.

Answer 5

Exactly, but that's what ignorant people do....assume. And when you assume, you generally make an (first 3 letters of assume) out of yourself. Although I don't believe in abortion as a form of birth control, I do believe that a woman has the right to make the choice, whether I agree with it or not (some I totally understand, I wouldn't have a baby by my rapist/molester, or have some severe physical condition which may effect their longevity of life, why would I want my child to suffer?). I am not their maker, I am not their judge, it's their lives, not mine

Answer 6

I am a Pro-Life Atheist. To me abortion is killing another human and that equals murder to me. To me Pro-Choice is the same thing as saying that it is OK to kill another human.

So although I see the difference as you put it, the end result is that it is in favor of abortion and I really don't see how you can think that is a good thing.

This is especially true given the wide range of birth control available. I am very pro-birth control and I find it overwhelmingly irresponsible to be in the position where you are pregnant when you don't want to be.

Answer 7

The legalization of abortion is founded in Communist Russia.
At the time it became law, the amount of atrocities against humanity committed by the Communist regime is mind-boggling. You think the holocaust was bad? They starved millions of Ukrainians off the land so that they could take it over. There is no absolute record of death because so many people disappeared without a trace. The iron curtain came down, and they did what they wanted to their own people. This is where the word "genocide" was first used. It had never been used in the English language before. Welcome to the bloodbath. Make your "rights" more important than anyone else's. God will get you for that.

Answer 8

Sorry pal... that is WAYYY too rational for most people. The pro-lifers call the other side pro-abortion to be inflammatory, as they are more worried about that than being accurate. As far as your theory about it being the decision of the woman what goes on in her body, you are forgetting that the pro-life side is largely made up of Christians and other religious zealots who are more than happy to impose their ideas on your body, bedroom, etc.

I am a republican, but this is one place where my party and I part company.

Answer 9

This law does not give the woman control of her body, it gives her choice of another human being life, if they live or die.

Her choice is to get pregnant or not to get pregnant. That is her pro-choice. Anything past that is the murder of another human being. Like it our not, when you stop a heart you have committed murder.

Answer 10

Because unlike you pro-choice people, we pro-life people don't play with equivocation. Nobody is trying to say that you are pro-abortion in the sense that you want people to get abortions, but in the sense that you are in favor of laws to keep abortion legal (pro-abortion).