Why do people who are opposed to abortion insist on using ridiculously inflammatory language?

Question

I understand and respect the "pro-life" position when it comes from someone who genuinely wants to protect life. But I don't understand this increasing insistence on referring to all abortions as "murder" and all of its "victims" as "babies". As if women who take a morning after pill or RU486 are doing the equivalent of shooting their 2 year old. When pressed, it seems apparent that most prolife people don't really either. Not deep down. If 800,000 American two year olds were scheduled to be murdered this year, I would be compelled to spend all of my energy, all of my time, all of my money, and even my life to stop it. If someone were coming to kill my 2 year old neighbor, parent or not, I would fight him to the death. If one truly believes that a 2 year old equals a fetus, who equals an embryo who equals a stem cell, then why don't more of you feel morally obliged to commit drastic acts of civil disobedience in their protection? Thanks in advance for your thorough responses!

Most of your responses failed to thoroughly answer the question. Why is nuance so foreign to so many people, especially in this country? Why can't you see that you might be able to bring people on board with some of your ideas if you at least more AUTHENTIC with your language? If you truly believed that a Holocaust is going on, equal to the killing of toddlers, then fine. Just ACT in accordance with that notion. Show us how horrible it really is. Go on hunger strikes, camp out for weeks at a time. SACRIFICE. STAGE SIT INS. Remember Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks, Gandhi, etc.? Do you remember the egregious injustice that they were faced with? Did they respond just by calling people names on Yahoo Answers? And they weren't even dealing with actual Holocausts! If abortion is not just sad and unfortunate but actual murder of actual chihldren, then the people you should be criticizing is YOURSELVES for doing virtually NOTHING about it.

If actual 1 year olds in your own family were about to be murdered, and we lived in a country where it were legal, wouldn't you be utterly cowardly to just accept that as the law? Just as the Germans who were aware of the Holocaust were cowardly for not protecting children, even if it meant jail or death for themselves? I am not talking to the small minority of you whose actions are in accordance with your words, those who spend all of their time, money and energy on this issue, but I strongly suspect that noone who spends even a minute looking at Yahoo Answers on the internet falls into that category. By the way, to those who claim that breaking the law will "do nothing- only land us in jail." -I defy you to name a revolutionary social movement that didn't initially land people in jail, whether it be the abolition of slavery, the vote for women, integration, the movement for American independence, etc. And none of these movements were even about the outright murder of children!

Answer 1

Abortion is a selfish act by people who don't want to live with the consequences of their actions. I don't care if you agree with that statement or not. It's my opinion and I am free to express it. Unfortunately, we have a law that allows this type of murder to take place. We have laws that allow the murder of convicted felons also. People complain about pro-life protests which are usually peaceful, vocal, but peaceful. People were outraged (and rightly so) when a few abortion clinic bombings took place. Now you are saying to commit drastic acts of civil disobedience to protect our beliefs? Make up your mind. I will not kill to change a law. I will be vocal though. Don't listen if you don't like what I have to say.

God Bless.

Answer 2

If you feel strongly enough about a topic, at some point or some disscussion your bound to get hot. That often leads to the "inflammatory" lanuage. Most pro-life people view the point of inception as the beginning of life. Therefore all abortions would be murder under that stipulation. The Morning after is not largly considered as abortion because it is undetermined if an egg had been fertilized.

"If 800,000 American two year olds were scheduled to be murdered this year, I would be compelled..." the big difference here is those abortions are law. There are debatable civil laws all around the world. When a law is widely politically if not socially accepted would you continuouslly break it to make your point. That is up to the individual. And there have been individuals who have chosen to do so.

Answer 3

As with most arguments, the real problem is one of definition. When does "life" begin? When does a group of cells become a "person/human being"? If you believe in souls, when is the soul linked to the body?

Everyone has slightly different answers to these questions, and their personal definitions will greatly influence their stance on the question. For example, many pro-choice people feel that life/personhood/soul cannot be granted equally to a lump of cells a few hours/days/weeks old as to a baby or adult already born and in full existance. Many pro-lifers pinpoint the first spark of life at the instant of fertilization, whereas many pro-choicers might argue that real life/personhood does not begin until the fetus becomes viable (can live independent of the mother's womb despite premature birth).

Both sides have reasonable and valid points, but using close-minded and inflammatory language prevents the chance of a sincere dialogue and exchange of information, so I've noticed that the pro-life camp tends to hurt its own cause by refusing to listen to the other side and trying to force their own rules on everyone. The pro-choice side is generally willing to let pro-lifers make the personal decision that is right for them, and only asks for the right to make their own decisions for themselves, so their request is inherently more reasonable.

Answer 4

You could say that's the same as when pro-abortionists call babies or fetuses "just a mass of cells".

Why don't we feel morally obliged to commit drastic acts of civil disobedience? First, because two wrongs don't make a right. (I don't agree with homosexuality or adultery either, but those are both legal, and I sure wouldn't attack someone who does that either.) But more importantly, because ultimately we answer to God, as everyone does. So we do what we can legally, such as protesting, speaking up for the babies who can't speak for themselves, supporting pro-life organizations, fighting for baby-friendly legislation (which in turn causes all the pro-abortionists to yell at us for that). And in the end those who perform or have abortions will have to answer to God also.

And I totally abhor the killing of abortion doctors. "Christians" who do that are worse than the doctors. And they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. It obviously makes no sense murdering someone just to try and save another life.

Answer 5

First of all, I'm glad that you respect our right to protect life. However, to say that using the word baby for what is carried inside of a mother is inflammatory, well, that is something that we hold very dear to us.

Let me put this into perspective for you. When a woman has a miscarriage, I have never heard one say that they lost a clump of cells, a fetus, or a stem cell. To that woman, they were carrying a baby and have just lost a baby. For many of these women it is just as hard as losing a child after it was born.

That's why when we hear that there are no rights for the unborn, we see it as a loss of life, regardless of the stage. To us, it is the same to destroy a 3 week, 6, week, or 20 week old fetus as it is to destroy a child once it is born.

And I think that is the clear difference here. You see it as not a human being worthy of rights until after it is born. We see it differently.

Answer 6

Pregnancy is a blessing not a punishment. If they do not want to keep the baby than they should give it up for adoption because God knows what is best for that child. Christians appose abortion because we believe it is killing an innocent human being. It is life that is being murdered. And as a Christian I'm looking at the whole picture, the baby isn't the only one that is a victim so is the women who get them done. They are never the same and I don't want them to go through with it.

Answer 7

Basically because it's what they actually believe is happening. They're trying to portray the seriousness of what they believe in, so they're not shying away from strong words.

Why more don't feel morally obliged to commit drastic acts of civil disobedience in their protection is because all that would do is put them in jail. It's an unfortunate reality that abortion exists in our society, but the only way to get that changed is by going through the proper channels. Breaking the law isn't going to further anyone's cause.

Answer 8

I see your point. But no matter how small, a fetus is a living thing. Its not like these women are smashing cockroaches, they are terminating the development of a human being that was formed by their carelessness in most cases. You cant have a baby and then just decide you dont want it and kill it, right? Why should someone have the right to kill an unborn child, no matter what stages the fetus is in becasue they dont want it?

Answer 9

The inflammatory language continues because even the anti-choice people use it. Example, when people hear that abortion is a service provided at a facility named women's health center the anti-choice group will call it an abortion clinic. Yet, abortion is only one of MANY services that is provided, there. Then the pro-choice movement continues the incorrect name of abortion clinic. It's all in the verbiage - partial-birth abortion is also an incorrect term, and the pro-choice allows that term to be used in their rebuttals. The answer is because pro-choice people continue to use the inflammatory language.

Answer 10

For thousands of years, killing an unborn baby was against every moral and legal code. The Hippocratic Oath which was taken by doctors specifically stated that a doctor was not to perform an abortion. The pro-abortion forces in this country (USA) undertook a campaign to change the verbiage of the abortion debate. Unborn child became "fetus." Killing became "therapeutic abortion." Pro-abortion became "pro-choice." Dead baby became "products of conception."
We have all been so brainwashed with the pro-abortion rhetoric that it sounds shocking to hear it described in honest, forthright terms. It's no coincidence that women giving birth to a live baby, then killing it or throwing it in the trash has become so common today. We have cheapened all life by allowing over a million abortions per year in this country.