abortion, Anti-Choice, clinics, Democrats, evil bigots, fetus, ideological fuzziness, intellectual cowardice, irritating, NOW, Pro Semi-Life, Pro-Abortion, Pro-Choice, Pro-Life, protesters, reproductive freedom, Republicans, sanctity of life, Semi Pro-Life, strident, tame that beast!, Terrorism, women's issues, women's rights
In so many instances an American’s political allegiance boils down to his or her opinions on abortion. It makes a certain sense for someone who feels strongly enough about a single issue to be attracted to the political party which shares that view. A darker corollary is proving increasingly true: more people than ever seem to modify their beliefs on the so-called sanctity of life based on the political party to which they are affiliated.
The foes of legal abortion tend to be Republicans, while those who favor at least some access to abortions align themselves with the Democrats. The former call themselves pro-life, and the latter pro-choice. The pro-life and pro-choice movements have tags for one another as well, pro-abortion and anti-choice.
That’s quite a bit of name-calling between two groups who, based upon their core tenets, are both pretty hypocritical. The names these groups give to themselves show how they would like to be perceived as champions of life or of a woman’s freedom to choose her destiny. In the same spirit, both groups labor diligently to portray themselves as champions against an unspeakable evil. However, upon closer examination, it seems that both sides tend to go a little fuzzy when it comes to ideological consistency.
The most zealous among the Pro-Choice movement do not consider a fetus to be human until it is viable outside the womb, typically late in the third trimester. This despite the many instances of children born as early as five months who, thanks to advances in technology grow up to lead happy and productive lives.
These people regard embryonic humans as commodities, and have no issues whatsoever mortgaging the lives of children today to serve the hypothetical children of tomorrow. In contrast to this antiseptic callousness is the heated ruthlessness with which the choicers pursue their aims, having no shame in attributing sinister motives to anyone not in lockstep with their vision of a D&C as contraception. So if Michael J. Fox dies from Parkinson’s, I guess that’s just God’s will, huh?
However, when the death penalty is mentioned, the bulk of the Pro-Choicers are aghast: The state doesn’t have the right to kill anyone!, they breathlessly intone. Human life isn’t something to simply be thrown away!
Pro-Life groups, on the other hand, venerate the fetus. They make no distinction between aborted and unaborted fetuses, and in fact feature ghastly images of aborted fetuses on everything from protest signs to their dinnerware. In their mission to save a billion lives of the yet-unborn, they see nothing wrong in terrifying and humiliating the young women who, sometimes in the direst circumstances, find their way to a clinic. Moreover, the more lunatic among them see nothing ironic in blowing up clinics, killing doctors or various other terroristic acts in an effort to show how much God values human life.
However, the Pro-Life view of the death penalty harkens back to the Old Testament’s call for An eye for an eye. On this issue, it seems, theirs is a God of vengeance and retribution.
One thing which quickly becomes clear is that while both the Pro-Life movement and the Pro-Choice movement would like very much to believe that their politics stem from a clear and delineated moral code, it just isn’t so.
Both of these self-righteous influence gangs will continue to wrap themselves in terms like Choice and Life, words which their own one-sided agendas have rendered meaningless. Instead of Pro-Life and Pro-Choice, why don’t we call these hypocrites what they really are?: Pro Semi-Life and Semi Pro-Life.