A Modest Proposal

| | Comments (5)

Following on the strategy of those who "support women's rights" in properly staging our propaganda, I modestly propose renaming the group.

Pro-abortion suggests something positive. The pro-abortion group has caught on to this and their journalists commonly label pro-life people "anti-choice." This is a very strong piece of subtle propaganda and very well delivered. Anti- carries with it an enormous onus, and when one is anti-choice, well. . .

Perhaps, then, following the leads of our confrères in this regard we should consider a more appropriate, more astringent label for those who "support women's rights" while depriving the unborn of all, even life itself. Perhaps a more appropriate name for the ardent pro-abortionist pack would be "Anti-life." In this manner we may use the appropriate censuring tone, while stating our own displeasure and disapproval of being labeled. If we cannot choose our own label and have it respected, perhaps the same courtesy should be offered the opposing camp. And as regards the child in the womb, anti-life is nothing short of true.

Bookmark and Share


I most heartily agree. Labels are more critical than we realize. "Pro-" anything suggests optimism and "anti-" connotes pessimism. And, if the last few elections have taught us anything, optimism always wins with the electorate.


I've discovered from experience that no matter how mad the pro-choice camp makes us, it is more effective to continually treat them with respect. I do not call them "anti-life" or "pro-death" or even "pro-abortion", but consistently use the term "pro-choice".

I do this not because I am a wimpy, spineless liberal who is afraid to use the truth. I am a liberal, but I'm also pro-life. Nor do I do this because I expect the pro-choicers to show me the same respect (some of them - many of them - won't).

I do this for one reason, and one reason only.

I have found from experience that I have occassionally actually changed minds and hearts on this issue by treating people respectfully even when mistreated. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say God worked on their mind and heart through me.

I have never changed a single mind or heart when I sunk to their level.

And though my single motivation for doing this was that I simply found it was occassionally effective, I find it mysteriously awesome that the Gospel gives us the same advice: bless those who insult and curse you.

I'm not saying this is easy, and I slip up from time to time. If I can catch myself in the act, I'll even apologize, and if I don't catch myself, I'll pray on it later.


Dear JCecil3,

As you well know, I oppose labels in general. I agree with the sentiments you express above.

And so I am conflicted. But I think it is time that the labels speak truth. Calling someone pro-choice panders to their own sense of self, but I do wonder whether or not more hearts are converted by the unvarnished truth, no matter what its harshness. I think both serve a purpose. One thing I do not want to do is allow people living in complacency to be comfortable with meaning and truth of what they espouse.

There are many ways in which this works, and as with disciplining a child, different ways will speak to different people. I think it's important to speak out in all the ways that will articulate this pressing need. I have found that a bracing slap in the face is sometimes a sovereign remedy to invincible ignorance.

You've found better success with other means and that is fantastic. I've found facing people with the facts often gets closer to the desired results. But all must be done in both courtesy and greater charity. To state that pro-choice is anti-life is neither derogatory nor is it negative (while it may be perceived as such) it is simply the truth and "the truth will set you free."

However, I do agree with you that there are a great many ways of delivering that truth. As I said, some respond better with one than another it is good to have many arrows in the quiver when engaging in the fight for life.

Also, please keep in mind that this post isn't about 1-to-1 conversations, but rather about propaganda. It is an unpleasant political and social reality of the human animal that propaganda however delivered persuades more people more easily than any amount of televised reasoned argumentation. I would never dream or think of labeling a person with whom I was talking anti-life. (Truth to tell, I so dislike labels, I wouldn't dream of doing so in writing about a group. However, I do acknowledge how powerful and potent a weapon propaganda is in the fight to save lives.

So while my personal stand is closer to your own, my feeling is that our journalists should be more militant about our own side of the propaganda war.



I'm quite happy to say I'm anti-choice. Some choices are so barbaric and inhuman, that they ought to be opposed: for example, stringing bombs across the gym of a school while holding thousands of children and adults hostage in that gym, and elsewhere in the school. Likewise killing the innocent child.

Of course, I also insist that I am pro-life. If a pro-choice person is going to say, "Well, I'm pro-life too," I'll answer, "You're not pro-embryonic life, though, are you?" Hmm... maybe I won't. That's too much of a mouthful.

Anyway, I see JCecil's point of view, and I see Steven's point of view, and I like what both of you say. I wish I could do more than express outrage, but that's pretty much what it's come to these days... :-(


I have read you long enough to know your disdain for labels and for rash judgment. I also have read you enough to know you would never intentionally want to treat someone with disrespect.

I also understand you desire to help people see the truth of what they are claiming when they claim to be pro-choice. We are talking about a choice to deliberately kill an innocent human being.

The way I handle it is not to correct them when they say I am anti-abortion, nor to retort with a label for them that they are anti-life or pro-death.

Instead, I use the Socratic method. Ask them what they are chosing. Of course, their immeidate answer will be somthing like "reproductive choice" or "control of my own body". It will take time and listening. Soemtimes, you'll deal with the fact that the porson you are talking to had an abortion, and will have a harder time admitting that what they did already was murder. We have to be sensitive to this.

The point is that most of the time when I actually saw a mind and heart changed, it took a long time of asking questions and listening and being respectful throughout.

And to get the chance to just say what I really think, I always have my blog. Yet, even here, I would hope that I reach more than repel.




About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Steven Riddle published on September 16, 2004 8:33 AM.

Soulmaking--Alan Jones was the previous entry in this blog.

A Gift--Via Smockmomma is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

My Blogroll