Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21
  1. #1
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,656
    Post Thanks / Like

    Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    This is kind of a spin-off of the "True Meaning of" threads.

    As I understand it, the opposing sides of the abortion debate call themselves "pro-life" and "pro-choice"

    And when referring to each other the common terms are "pro-abortion" and "anti-choice".

    But if one seeks a neutral moniker for the groups, I think the most accurate terms are:

    Anti-abortion - I mean is anyone on that side going to say that this term does not accurately represent their viewpoint? Sure, pro-life sounds better but then it's not completely accurate unless you likewise oppose capital punishment, war, hunting, killing flies (flies are living creatures), etc.

    Pro Abortion-Rights "Pro-choice" is not entirely accurate because besides total anarchists, everyone is for limiting others' choices to some extent (like the choice to kill those who are already born). Nor is "pro-abortion" accurate because that implies someone is for abortion while someone can be morally against abortion but feel that it's still that women should have the right to choose it. Just being morally against something does not always equate believing it should be outlawed. Pro-abortion rights means that one supports the right to abortion, but not necessarily abortion itself, which I believe is an accurate descriptor of those who call themselves "pro-choice".

    So those, I believe, are the best descriptors of both sides of the abortion debate.

  2. #2
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,785
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    This is kind of a spin-off of the "True Meaning of" threads.

    As I understand it, the opposing sides of the abortion debate call themselves "pro-life" and "pro-choice"

    And when referring to each other the common terms are "pro-abortion" and "anti-choice".

    But if one seeks a neutral moniker for the groups, I think the most accurate terms are:

    Anti-abortion - I mean is anyone on that side going to say that this term does not accurately represent their viewpoint? Sure, pro-life sounds better but then it's not completely accurate unless you likewise oppose capital punishment, war, hunting, killing flies (flies are living creatures), etc.

    Pro Abortion-Rights "Pro-choice" is not entirely accurate because besides total anarchists, everyone is for limiting others' choices to some extent (like the choice to kill those who are already born). Nor is "pro-abortion" accurate because that implies someone is for abortion while someone can be morally against abortion but feel that it's still that women should have the right to choose it. Just being morally against something does not always equate believing it should be outlawed. Pro-abortion rights means that one supports the right to abortion, but not necessarily abortion itself, which I believe is an accurate descriptor of those who call themselves "pro-choice".

    So those, I believe, are the best descriptors of both sides of the abortion debate.
    I agree with your OP 100%, with the caveat that "Anti-Abortion" seems to be a little restrictive. Most people against abortion have no problems with abortions done to save the life of the mother, or because of rape or incest.

  3. #3
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,019
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    each other the common terms are "pro-abortion" and "anti-choice".

    But if one seeks a neutral moniker for the groups, I think the most accurate terms are:

    Anti-abortion -

    Pro Abortion-Rights

    So those, I believe, are the best descriptors of both sides of the abortion debate.
    To level the negative connotations of "Anti-", I suggest Anti-Unborn Right to Life. Sure its unwieldy, but we're discussing possibilities based solely on accuracy, right?

    Both would need to be accurate and anti, or accurate and pro. But not one pro and the other anti.

  4. #4
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,656
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by cds69 View Post
    I agree with your OP 100%, with the caveat that "Anti-Abortion" seems to be a little restrictive. Most people against abortion have no problems with abortions done to save the life of the mother, or because of rape or incest.
    Good point, but one can generally be against or for something with room for exceptions.

    By the same token, pro-abortion rights folk don't generally agree that there should be no restriction to abortion at any stage during the pregnancy. Most, I'm sure, support at least some restrictions on late-term abortion.

  5. #5
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,656
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by evensaul View Post
    To level the negative connotations of "Anti-", I suggest Anti-Unborn Right to Life. Sure its unwieldy, but we're discussing possibilities based solely on accuracy, right?
    But "anti-unborn right to life" is just as accurate of "pro-abortion rights" (since they mean exactly the same thing) so there's no reason, based soley on accuracy, to choose one over the other.

    But if one of the terms is more confusing and therefore is more likely to cause people to get the wrong impression on hearing it (and therefore decreases accuracy in communicating the concept), then it's not as useful as the alternative. And since "pro-abortion rights" is less confusing than "anti-unborn right to life", it is the better term between the two, accuracy-wise.

  6. #6
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,782
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by evensaul View Post
    To level the negative connotations of "Anti-", I suggest Anti-Unborn Right to Life. Sure its unwieldy, but we're discussing possibilities based solely on accuracy, right?......
    Ok then, then the other side would be "Pro-government-controls-women's bodies-against-women's-will".

  7. #7
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pacific NW (for now)
    Posts
    1,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by spotty View Post
    Ok then, then the other side would be "Pro-government-controls-women's bodies-against-women's-will".
    I think you need to either have a reference to fetuses or abortion somewhere in whatever name you come up with.

    Contrariwise, if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.

  8. #8
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,782
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    FAir, how about anti-abortion means "pro-women's-bodies-don't-belong-to-them-during-pregnancy"

  9. #9
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,019
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by spotty View Post
    Ok then, then the other side would be "Pro-government-controls-women's bodies-against-women's-will".
    lol

    yes! And then we could go on to "Against-killing-defenseless-unborn-babies-who-could-be-ADOPTED-but-are-usually-killed-just-because-having-a-baby-isn't-really-CONVENIENT". I really think that would be the most accurate, and it's about as clear as can possibly be.

  10. #10
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,381
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by spotty View Post
    Ok then, then the other side would be "Pro-government-controls-women's bodies-against-women's-will".
    No, more like "Pro-government-allows-women-to-end-a-human-life-without-consent-of-said-human-life."
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  11. #11
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,795
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    This is a non-issue. Everyone understands what is meant by "pro-choice" and "pro-life". Therefore, the purpose of language, communication, has been achieved.

    Who gives a damn whether a socially isolated, reasonable human being with a English dictionary would correctly understand "pro-choice" and "pro-life"? We all exist in a social context. Embrace it.
    Freedom is you choosing for yourself. Law is the government choosing for you. The two are opposites.

    Pray - To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy - Ambrose Bierce
    Faith - Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge about things without parallel - Ambrose Bierce

  12. #12
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pacific NW (for now)
    Posts
    1,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    I think the problem people have with these terms is not so much whether the term used to describe the opposite position is not an accurate descriptor of the opposite side, but rather whether it isn't also an accurate descriptor of themselves.

    For example, the pro-lifer isn't so upset that the pro-choicer isn't pro-choice in the most general sense possible, but rather they are upset about the implication that pro-lifers aren't pro-general choice. Pro-lifers can be pro choice in a lot of areas, and they don't like it implied otherwise.

    Likewise, the pro-choicer isn't so upset that pro-lifer might support the death penalty and humane euthanasia, but rather they are upset about the implication that pro-choicers don't value life and are actually "against it". Pro-choicers can be pro life in a lot of areas, and they don't like an implication otherwise either.

    Contrariwise, if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.

  13. #13
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,077
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Really abortion boils down to a matter of if a fetus is a person and entitled to all the rights thereof.

    but....

    I can't think of a catchy way of saying that without having possible broader meanings.

    How about this...
    Rights at conception
    Rights at birth

    Accurate perhaps but not catchy and it leaves out those of us more in the middle...
    Rights at viability
    or
    Rights at some slightly arbitrary middle point.

    Of course in some ways abortion goes beyond all that...

    Why are fetuses like vampires?
    Well they drink your blood for starters.
    Once you invite them in you have to kill them to make them leave
    They can't survive without direct dependence on other people

    So pro life is something like....
    All vampires must be protected.
    If you invite a vampire in your home, even by accident you must take care of them until they leave of their own will.

    Pro choice is something like....
    While a vampire lives in your home you may kill it or have it killed for you.

    I love bad analogies... but I think the point is there. A fetus isn't quite the same as other people (even if you call it a person from conception). Its circumstances are pretty specific and kind of unique. If a person it is a person utterly dependent on and essentially leaching from another person. The fetus is captive of the mother, and if you go with a pure pro life stance, the mother is also captive of the fetus.

    The various shades of position between the extremes where the fetus is to some extent subordinate to the mother and not on equal footing. It is about the conflicting rights of two different entities.

    For me, a fetus is not entirely a person. The longer it develops, the more of a person it becomes. Viability is a key point where the argument for full person hood is much much stronger.

  14. #14
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    9,656
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by Castle View Post
    This is a non-issue. Everyone understands what is meant by "pro-choice" and "pro-life". Therefore, the purpose of language, communication, has been achieved.

    Who gives a damn whether a socially isolated, reasonable human being with a English dictionary would correctly understand "pro-choice" and "pro-life"? We all exist in a social context. Embrace it.
    Well, we had two separate threads about the "true meaning" of both of the terms "pro-life" and "pro-choice" and the inadequacies/inaccuracies of the terms so apparently there is some controversy and interest in debating the terms themselves.

    The OP of this thread is something that could have been posted in either thread but I decided to start a new thread positing what is the most technically accurate terms.

    I don't expect, even if everyone agrees with the OP, for there to be a change of which terms are generally used to describe both camps so as far as that possibility goes, it is a non-issue.

    But people do often (even outside of this thread) debate the terms so for those who are interested in this debate (and if you aren't, then you are welcome to not post here at all), here's my position on what would be more accurate than the commonly-used terms.

  15. #15
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,782
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalupsis View Post
    No, more like "Pro-government-allows-women-to-end-a-human-life-without-consent-of-said-human-life."
    So we'll just ignore the fact that the woman no longer has control over her own body?

    Look, I'm no fan of abortion but one must recognize that an anti abortion law basically denies a woman sovereinity(is this even a word?) over her own body.
    It denies her this basic freedom. Imagine yourself in a woman's body Apok. You've got this thing growing inside you which you don't want. But the government says too bad. You don't own your body for a while, we do. You just have to put up with it.

  16. #16
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    The real Miami
    Posts
    276
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by spotty View Post
    So we'll just ignore the fact that the woman no longer has control over her own body?

    Look, I'm no fan of abortion but one must recognize that an anti abortion law basically denies a woman sovereinity(is this even a word?) over her own body.
    It denies her this basic freedom. Imagine yourself in a woman's body Apok. You've got this thing growing inside you which you don't want. But the government says too bad. You don't own your body for a while, we do. You just have to put up with it.
    While that is true, the fact is, abortion would be very useful in many third world countires. Women in those places, who lack many rights, need to be educated and respected. They also need to stop having kids in the midst of all that poverty. In america on the other hand, its mostly a "closing your legs" issue. its not that necessary here. i think we have too much resources and knowledge to be dealing with irresponsible people who dont use protection and birth control. abortions should only be allowed under special circumstances here.
    CHANGE is what the world awaits
    Could there be Peace or War?
    The Answer? No one knows.
    Just trusting the break of dawn.

  17. #17
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pacific NW (for now)
    Posts
    1,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Really abortion boils down to a matter of if a fetus is a person and entitled to all the rights thereof.

    but....

    I can't think of a catchy way of saying that without having possible broader meanings.

    How about this...
    Rights at conception
    Rights at birth
    The term Rights at birth left me with an interesting thought. What other rights (other than "to life") would a fetus have? Could they have the right to own property? Can I leave my property to an unborn entity? If a mother gets welfare for her children, should she be able to collect on this as soon as the child is viable?


    Rights at some slightly arbitrary middle point.
    I think there would be an objection to the term "arbitrary".

    Why are fetuses like vampires?
    Well they drink your blood for starters.
    Once you invite them in you have to kill them to make them leave
    They can't survive without direct dependence on other people

    So pro life is something like....
    All vampires must be protected.
    If you invite a vampire in your home, even by accident you must take care of them until they leave of their own will.

    Pro choice is something like....
    While a vampire lives in your home you may kill it or have it killed for you.

    I love bad analogies... but I think the point is there.
    I didn't know whether to disrep you for this horrible analogy or rep you for acknowledging it as one.

    A fetus isn't quite the same as other people (even if you call it a person from conception). Its circumstances are pretty specific and kind of unique.
    But all sorts of people are in pretty specific situations, the mentally retarded, the terminally ill, those in a coma, those who are too young to speak, minors who we don't think have the where-with-all to drive or vote, those who want to commit suicide, etc. We still don't justify taking their lives without their consent, and we rarely condone taking their lives with their consent.

    The various shades of position between the extremes where the fetus is to some extent subordinate to the mother and not on equal footing. It is about the conflicting rights of two different entities.
    In general we resolve this by saying, you can do what you want as long as it doesn't harm the other.

    For me, a fetus is not entirely a person. The longer it develops, the more of a person it becomes. Viability is a key point where the argument for full person hood is much much stronger.
    Would you support a woman who wanted to have herself purged of the baby via induced labor or c-section as soon as a certain number of weeks had passed? If she was willing to give it up for adoption?

    Contrariwise, if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.

  18. #18
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    I prefer the terms pro choice and pro life. Anti abortion is acceptable to me, but I don't like using the term 'anti choice' against lifers because this sounds a little disrespectful.

    When someone refers to my views, I prefer them to refer to me as being pro choice, not pro abortion. I do not support all abortions, but I support the choice to have one. I see myself as being pro choice, and if thats the case, then I expect to be referred to as being pro choice.

    It irks me how some lifers get angered when I call them anti choice in response to them calling me pro abortion. I am happy to show you the respect your position deserves, and I will respect your position, but when you disrespect my position and call me something I am not, I will fight back.


    So thats a little off topic, but it's my two cents.
    Frozen In Time Yearning Forbidden Wishes Damned And Divine
    Scars Of My Broken Kisses What Will Follow If Tomorrow's Blind? My Eternal Night.

  19. #19
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Where ever you tell me, Drill Sergeant!
    Posts
    2,199
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Pro-Abortion-Rights.

    Pro-Abortion-Illegalization.

    That works. And both get a "pro," no one is stuck with an "anti"... I mean, if we really have to get all politically correct...

    Or we could just stick to the old way, and forget all of this idiocy.
    The Signature Religion is the one true religion. I know this is true, because it says so right here in this signature.

  20. #20
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,077
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Accurate Descriptors of Both Sides of the Abortion Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by AliceLiddell View Post
    Would you support a woman who wanted to have herself purged of the baby via induced labor or c-section as soon as a certain number of weeks had passed? If she was willing to give it up for adoption?
    Generally not. I think if we have a law that viability determines person hood then if the induced labor etc lessons the kids chance to survive, then its not good medicine to do so. Carry to term and then adopt the child out.

    I'm sure before too long we will figure out how to make artificial wombs and we could take any and all embryos to term. Medicine is going to give us some very interesting moral questions before too long.

 

 
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. What is your MBTI type?
    By Trendem in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: May 31st, 2016, 07:04 AM
  2. Lawsuit Filed for Baby Born Alive and then Killed
    By Megan in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: February 23rd, 2009, 04:43 PM
  3. Is Abortion Murder?
    By xB3ngALidiVaX in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 426
    Last Post: July 11th, 2008, 12:07 AM
  4. Arizona Sheriff Refuses Transport to Abortion Clinic
    By RTShatto in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: November 10th, 2004, 05:49 PM
  5. Abortion
    By Jordan in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: May 30th, 2004, 05:07 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •