Tags
The post wherein I nitpick the nomenclature of the abortion debate:
Let’s all stop using the term “pro-life”. Let’s evict it from the abortion conversation altogether.
We’re all “pro life”, aren’t we? Where pro loosely means “for”, I’d say the large majority of rational adults are … pro life. We’re for life. I’m for life. We want people to be born. We want people to be healthy, and loved, and wanted. If the conversation moves beyond the fetal, life is this whole big thing we’re living, full of love and learning and challenge and sorrow and joy. I’m so totally pro all that.
When you stick “pro” in front of “life”, the inverse becomes anti-life. But that’s not what we are.
We’re pro-choice.
The inverse of that is anti-choice. That’s what we should use.
The debate is not, for us, about life. It’s about choice, and the right of choice.
So do me a solid and get “pro-life” outa there. Let’s call it what it is: anti-choice.
iamlaurenleonardi.wordpress.com 
Would same apply to gun control? Pro-choice and anti-choice?
Seems like there are plenty of situations where govt restriction of our choices is appropriate. No?
Since I believe in consciously avoiding the use of terms that drive people away from discussion, I can’t agree. When you use a term like “anti-choice”, you provoke your opposition to immediately label you “pro-abortion”, and all meaningful exchange ceases. Likewise I try not to use other characterizations that might be accurate, but remain divisive, like “pro-birth/anti-woman” or even “pro death penalty”.
My tactic in conversation is to allow their pick of what to be “pro”, while insisting they respect my choice of what to be in favor of as well. Your explanation of the real meaning of pro life is the point of common ground to expand outward from.