“Pro-choice”: an illusion and a misnomer

By Maria Gallagher, Legislative Director, Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation

When I began working as a radio reporter while still in college, I quickly learned how decisively important the choice of words was and is in conveying the meaning of a story.

On the topic of abortion, for example, I thought that the best way to refer to the “pro” and “con” sides was the way they referred to themselves—“pro-life” and “pro-choice.”

But I found out that this terminology was not preferred by the bible of the journalism industry—the Associated Press stylebook. If I recall correctly, at that time the AP’s preferred usage was “abortion rights supporters” and “opponents of abortion rights.” (Of course, describing anything as a “right” suggests it cannot be challenged.)

As it turned out, even though I was writing my own stories, I had no choice in the matter—my bosses required me to follow the AP stylebook.

But in my own private conversations, I continued to use the “pro-life” and “pro-choice” labels.

It was some time later that I came to realize that one label was correct and the other was not.

“Pro-life” is a wonderfully descriptive term because it states quite clearly what an advocate stands for. It is far more inclusive than “anti-abortion” or “anti-euthanasia.”

Pro-life connotes a respect for all innocent human life, from the moment of conception to the instant of natural death. It is an expression of hope and wisdom. I am happy to use the term to describe myself and what I believe.

But “pro-choice” is a misnomer. For one thing, a preborn child has no choice when it comes to abortion—a decision to abort is thrust upon the precious offspring.

Moreover, it can be difficult to talk “choice” when a woman is coerced into having an abortion by a husband, boyfriend, parent, or even a grandparent. When, as research indicates, as many as 60% of abortions are coerced, the so-called “choice” is often made by someone other than the mother of the child.

Still, what finally made me abandon the term “pro-choice” was the recognition that anyone who laid claim to the term was campaigning to shore up the abortion industry—to continue the tragedy known as abortion on demand. Pro-choicers were making a conscious decision to see that the abortion trade continues, in spite of the fact that abortion takes one innocent life and leaves a mother to grieve the loss of an irreplaceable child.

It is fascinating to note that many abortion advocates themselves are abandoning the “pro-choice” terminology and instead embracing phrases such as “reproductive justice” or “repro rights.” In a real sense these new monikers are even more deceptive than “pro-choice.”

But, no matter what you call it, the result is the same—more than 61 million preborn children’s lives tragically ended.

Recent Posts

National Right to Life commends and thanks our affiliate, SC Citizens for Life (SCCL)

National Right to Life commends and thanks our affiliate, SC Citizens for Life (SCCL) for their hard… Read More

3 days ago

66 percent of respondents described would-be Biden reelection as either a “setback” or a “disaster”

Numbers “horrible” says CNN’s Jake Tapper By Dave Andrusko This week’sdevastating CNN poll gauging how the America… Read More

3 days ago

NRL Convention 2023 schedules are out now!

Check out the full convention schedule with speakers, dozens of workshops AND the Teens for… Read More

3 days ago

MCCL GO again highlights first 1,000 days of life at 76th World Health Assembly

GENEVA, Switzerland — The first 1,000 days in the life of human being—from conception… Read More

3 days ago

Most women facing unplanned pregnancy prefer not to abort, study reveals

By Gayle Irwin A recent peer-reviewed study indicates most women who experience abortion do so… Read More

3 days ago

Judge Enjoins Fetal Heartbeat Protection Law, Sends Case to the S.C. Supreme Court

By Holly Gatling, Executive Director, South Carolina Citizens for Life COLUMBIA, S.C. (Friday, May 26,… Read More

3 days ago