When we look at the two, and based off my travels to Europe vs the US, I noticed that the debate is confusing for one major reason: pro choice is very well defined, but not pro life. Pro life implies somebody is alive, but then we look at certain EU states and they state it's pro life to the mom, at the expense of the baby, or it can be pro baby life, or pro life of the family. The concept of the debate uses such superfluous points, that the definitions of the language and assumptions can be changed on a dime. In this case, this made me think, we sohuldn't even be using the label. We should instead clearly delineate, that one is pro for the life of the baby, or pro Christian, but pro life in and of itself confers no meaning beyond being pro life to an entity which may or may not be the baby
When we look at the two, and based off my travels to Europe vs the US, I noticed that the debate is confusing for one major reason: pro choice is very well defined, but not pro life. Pro life implies somebody is alive, but then we look at certain EU states and they state it's pro life to the mom, at the expense of the baby, or it can be pro baby life, or pro life of the family. The concept of the debate uses such superfluous points, that the definitions of the language and assumptions can be changed on a dime. In this case, this made me think, we sohuldn't even be using the label. We should instead clearly delineate, that one is pro for the life of the baby, or pro Christian, but pro life in and of itself confers no meaning beyond being pro life to an entity which may or may not be the baby
(post is archived)