Do you understand that pro-choice is not the same as pro-abortion?

Answer 1

I understand that abortion is murder and that is the bottom line.

Answer 2

I do understand. Personally I myself would never get an abortion. But this is because I have a very loving family and many friends who would support me if I ended up pregnant before I was ready. Not everyone is so lucky. And besides there are times when it's necessary for health reasons. And back when it was illegal women got abortions anyway only it was in back alleys and other such places using whatever so many women lost not only their child but their own lives. At least with it legal only one life is lost. But I truly believe that it should be up to the woman to choose. There will always be people who will take advantage of these things but does that mean we should take away one person's right to choose what happens to their body just because another abused that choice?

Answer 3

I do, but it is a careful nuance, and epistemologically the difference only exists for a limited period. However, I take you question in the spirit in which it is asked (serious and deliberate) and so I explain my response.

Pro-Choice refers to the support for laws that allow abortion to take place. Pro-Abortion would, logically, demonstrate support for abortions over alternatives. Thus, it becomes a question of "I approve that you have an option, not of the option itself."

The problem with this arrangement is that it is only a construct; support for a law's presence, but not for its utilization, incurs a conflict the instant the decision to implement what the law allows comes into play.

The conundrum then can be phrased as follows: "I support your option to have an abortion, but I do not support your having an abortion." The only consistent approach out of this conundrum is to support the alternatives while allowing abortion to remain legal.

This is an interesting point because it provides for a common ground between the disparate pro-life and pro-choice camps. That common ground is, namely, sustained and widespread efforts to ameliorate that which causes women to choose abortions in the first place. If it is because of unprotected sex, then better education on birth control (although if the unintended pregnancy comes about because of faulty birth control, then abstinence would be the desired educational method) is proscribed. If it is because of abusive relationships, then a shelter should be supported. If it is financial reasons, then financial counseling combined with support in the form of babysitting and subsidized food, diapers, clothing and health care are called for.

The point is - if you want to be pro-choice but not pro-abortion, you MUST be willing to exhort and exhaust all available alternatives before calling for an abortion, and even then it remains a regrettable decision and regrettable situation.

***I will make one caveat, upon reflection. There are some in the pro-life movement who consider an abortion even in the event to save the life of the mother to be unforgiveable; not even the Catholic Church holds to this view. Say there is an ectopic pregnancy, by which a mother's life is imperiled. At this point, the pregnancy is no longer a child-sustaining situation but rather a potentially terminal illness, and abortion to save the mother is morally preferable to losing both mother and child.

Answer 4

Someone who is pro-choice might not want an abortion for themselves, but they do want the choice of an abortion to be made legal, so they do consider abortion morally right. Pro-lifers believe that abortion is murder, and not morally right. With the logic used above, they are not pro-choice, or they believe that abortion should not be made legal, and that a woman should not have the option of having an abortion. I believe that they are not exactly the same, but very close.

Answer 5

I'm pro-life, but I do favor exceptions where the mother's life is at risk or the mother was raped. I think counseling is in order, because the mother who has to abort because her life is in danger is likely to experience guilt, and because the mother who was raped needs to deal with the rape. Just aborting the baby won't heal her and may cause her more suffering down the line.

I believe the real choice that a woman has a right to occurs way before conception. And where a woman's right to choose whether or not to engage in sex that would result in pregnancy has been violated, I'm pro-criminal charges against her attacker.

The fetus is a human fetus, and feels pain in utero. I think that baby has a right to protection.

Our civil rights are based on the premise that we have freedom up to the point where we infringe on the rights of another. I'm all for a woman's right to choose until her rights infringe on an innocent child's right to live or to be treated humanely.

Answer 6

Yep, I get it.

I would not have an abortion, but I realize that I am incapable of making that decision for all other women. After all, how do YOU know what that particular woman is going through. And I know I'd rather have my daughter get an abortion, if she chose to do so, from a doctor in a sterile environment, not with a coat hanger by her boyfriend in the backseat of a car on a country road.

Making abortion illegal does not make it go away, it only drives it underground and makes it unsafe. Abortion has been happening for centuries, and is not going away any time soon, legal or not.

Answer 7

I understand that the term pro-choice is more for the freedom to make the decision while pro-abortion is in support of abortion, but in total I don't see how they differ. If you could elaborate on the difference, I'm certainly open-minded. Personally it just seems to me like trying to sugar coat the reality of it, but still, I'm open-minded.

Answer 8

No, to tell you the truth, I don't really understand or accept that it is much more than semantic trickery.

Allow me to explain my perspective on this. If you think about the reasons people have for opposing abortion, you could hardly expect us to.

If - as most of us in the anti-abortion camp feel - you accept the position that a gestating member of the species Homo Sapiens is in fact a human being, and that terminating that gestating being does not constitute a moral act, then choice just does not come into it.

Someone in our camp could not accept the abolition of laws prohibiting the termination of a fully grown human. And we see this much the same way; there are just some things we are unable to have a "live and let live feeling" about.

This is different, from say, marijuana. I can be "pro-choice" on that, in that I really think it is a very bad idea, but think that legalizing it is worth considering for a number of reasons (such as taking illegal Hell's angel grow-ops out of the equation, etc.)

But I can be that way, because in that case, I do not consider lives to be in the balance. That is the difference on this question: anyone who opposes abortion, typically opposes it for reasons that would preclude seeing it as even an ethically tolerable 'choice'.)

Answer 9

Of course, but I'm probably not to whom you're addressing this question. :-)

My ancestral culture practiced the exposure of infants in cases of obvious birth defect, doubts as to fatherhood, or lack of food. No one sensible would ever claim it was easy for them, any more than anyone *should* claim abortion is an easy choice for a woman.

I used to be more ambivalent about it, even though there's no moral proscription against abortion in my folkways. However, a few years back, an 18 month old boy was shaken and beaten to death by his 17 year old "father." The autopsy revealed massive prior abuse, including sexual abuse.

And y'know what? I just can't believe abortion is the WORST thing that can happen to a fetus anymore. Sometimes . . . being born would be.

Answer 10

Yeah pro choice is saying you support the choice of the mom . Pro abortion is saying you want abortion to happen

Answer 11

I realize that my personal answer is not a popular one.

I support women's right to choose. I personally am in favor or eugenics.

Men and women that should not have children should not get pregnant in the first place; though that would be a simpler solution, you can bet that the same "pro-life" people would object just as vehemently against sterilization.

There are plenty of temporary, low intrusion, inexpensive, REVERSIBLE surgeries for both men and women to make them unable to cause pregnancy. Heck, if it was such an issue, everyone who got the surgery could just make a frozen donation first in case they changed their mind.

Of course sterilized people would still have to wear protection, but there would be less "accidents" (unsafe acts of passion) resulting in unwanted babies.