Tonight I wish to tackle a few varied thoughts on the topic of “pro-life” and what that really means. In the generation of “political correctness,” one of the things often mentioned is to call people or groups by their preferred terminology. For example, most people of African origin in the United States tend to prefer the term “African-American” to “black.” Most actively homosexual people prefer “gay” to a host of other terms, some very ugly and derogatory, and the majority of females today tend to prefer being referred to as “women” rather than “ladies.” I for one think we should honor and respect those wishes for the most part, at least, unless it totally violates our personal convictions as the people of God.
What I find amazing, however, is that the reverse respect is not particularly applied. The very same people who would never disrespect someone racially or ethnically have no issue with changing the terminology used for those of us who are “pro-lifers” just for one. Almost without exception the term now chosen for us is “anti-abortion” while they remain “pro-choice” and would be very deeply offended if we called them “pro-abortion” or, worse but more accurately, “pro-deathers.” Yet one day someone, somewhere, decided it was more “correct” all around to change our movement’s preferred name, without asking those of us who actively support saving the lives of the unborn, as “anti-abortionists.” And somehow it seems to have stuck.
Part of the issue of course is valid–there are many supposedly “pro-lifers” who are anxious to save the unborn but do not show much concern for the currently and visibly alive here on earth, such as those in abject poverty or immigrants, or those on death row. Whatever one’s view on those issues, at very least we must deeply and actively care about the people who are in those situations. That too is part of being “pro-life” and always has been. Still, should it not be our choice what to call our own movement? I think the answer is fairly obvious.
But there is a deeper issue at hand. What is the motive behind this unasked-for change in terminology? I would contend it has to do with the continuing attempt to bring us together with the “pro-choice” movement. And while there are people on both sides of the issue who are honestly of good will, and who care deeply about society, we as “pro-life” folks have the specific goal of eliminating abortion from society, or at very least lessening its frequency and perceived need. That of course is a huge threat to the other camp whose main concern is the “woman’s right to choose.” President Barack Obama, arguably one of the most blatantly “pro-choice” leaders in the entire world today, rather creepily used the 39th anniversary of Roe v Wade to express his desire to keep abortion “safe and legal.” Here are his remarks on a day which many of us mark as one of the most tragic in world history. He rejoices for the women while we mourn for the untold millions of unborn.
- That Old Abortion Issue (inactiveactivist.wordpress.com)
- Over 400,000 March For Life In Washington DC (Pics and Videos) (wdednh.wordpress.com)
- Activists Will Stand for Life Outside NARAL’s Macabre “Celebration” of Abortion Deaths (deaconjohnspace.wordpress.com)
- “Abortion is as American as Apple Pie” – The Culture of Death Finds a Voice (trinityspeaks.wordpress.com)
- Abortion Not (Just) A Religious Issue – It’s Terry O’Neill Who Is “Poppycock” (neosecularist.com)
- Pro-Life Resources (pjcockrell.wordpress.com)
- Hostile Abortion Advocates Disrupt Prayer Service (deaconjohnspace.wordpress.com)
- -San Francisco: 40,000+ in West Coast ‘Pro-life’ March (answersforthefaith.com)