When I discuss abortion and reference the pro-choice side of the issue, I use the term abortion defender. It doesn’t (shouldn’t) come across as confrontational, poisonous, and accurate. I understand defenders of the right to elective abortion tend to prefer the term pro-choice. Many of those who take that position assert that the idea that it’s the choice they are arguing for, not abortion per-se. The choice entails either birth or abortion. However, I think this emphasis on choice is misleading, even if unintentionally so. Why is this? Because the pro-choice position only nurtures choice until there is the slightest interest in abortion as an option at which point the entire discussion moves from defending a choice to birth or abortion into full advocacy for abortion.
Think about it. Any time legislation requiring an informed non-impulsive decision the “pro-choice” side cry foul — loudly and with plenty of expletives. Laws requiring a waiting period in order to ensure the choice is not made in haste; emotional counselling; options such as adoption; ultrasound/heartbeat presentations so the mother can see and hear what it is she will be removing from her womb, et. al. the pro-choice movement goes all out in advocating that women should not have access to the information. But we should ask, why would they be against women making an informed and careful decision if it is only a choice they are defending? Why are they so vehemently opposed to women being persuaded to rethink having the abortion?
The answer is simple. They are pro-abortion. The only choice pro-choice advocates endorse is the choice for abortion. Every attempt to dissuade a mother of her decision to abort is followed by claims that women are being deprived of basic human rights necessary “health care”. Pro-abortion politicians and activists even coined a term for this: The War on Women. Listen, if I am mistaken, why is every attempt made (either by lawsuit or protest) to prevent the birth of the child?
It hasn’t gone unnoticed either that, to my knowledge, there are no crisis pregnancy centers owned and/or operated by self-described pro-choice individuals or organizations, which is either a grand coincidence, or as I argue, something more.
If it was choice that was the concern of pro-choice advocate and not the abortion, there would not be such vigorous attempts made to ensure mothers are prevented from information and measures which may persuade them to choose birth over abortion. Offering and encouraging a choice other than abortion is met with fierce opposition. Their protest says choice, but their actions demand abortion.