This topic has been locked by a moderator.
I often find that the terms pro life and pro choice are really limiting and end up just being divisive. It honestly depends on the situation and I’m probably pro choice about 2.5 % of the time because 2.5 % of abortions are done because of rape or the mothers/fetus’s life is in jeopardy. In those situations I truly believe that the choice to abort the baby should be readily available for all women in such a perilous situation. And this is because the basic tenets of pro life arguments break down in these situations.
"But it was the women’s choice to have that baby in the first place!"
Nope. Not in the case of rape.
"It’s about the baby’s body, not the mothers."
That obviously isn’t the case when her life is put in danger because of the baby.
"If you go through with the pregnancy, then that baby will live!"
Not if the fetus has serious health risks.
That being said, most would still consider me a pro lifer since I happen to hold such a stance on the other 97.5 % cases of abortions.
And usually I find that pro choicers will take the marginal case and use it as an excuse for the other 97 % of abortions. I’m willing to go into those other 97% of them if one understands that I agree on the other 2.5 % of justifiable cases.
Source on the 2.5% figure?
I often find that the terms pro life and pro choice are really limiting and end up just being divisive.
“pro choice” isn’t a divisive or limiting term. It’s literally about “choice”. “pro life” is somewhat divisive as it implies the other side is “pro death” and at the same time meaningless… because who isn’t for life?
I’m just glad that on this side of the pond this delicate issue isn’t a massive political football.
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
I’m just glad that on this side of the pond this delicate issue isn’t a massive political football.
Depends on how far away from the pond you are. The issue is huge in Poland and is part of how the fascists managed to gain power there in spite of their small numbers, using a policy alliance with more numerous conservative Catholics.
Anyone who is truly pro-life should also support all methods of reducing abortions, including sex-education and wide availability of contraception. Unfortunately, and especially when religion is involved, that’s very often not the case.
How is the term pro-choice limiting and divisive? It’s a legitimate description of the position, which is being in favor of the woman’s right to choose.
Anti-abortion is much more accurate than pro-life.
JEDIT: See also Ryan’s post.
There is one legitimate problem with the terms “pro-choice” and “pro-life”: They cause confusion. I myself sometimes mix up the two terms. Everybody likes life, and everybody likes choice. I know my opinion on the issue but sometimes have to ask myself, which “pro-” label should I identify myself with?
It’s weird.
There is one legitimate problem with the terms “pro-choice” and “pro-life”: They cause confusion. I myself sometimes mix up the two terms. Everybody likes life, and everybody likes choice. I know my opinion on the issue but sometimes have to ask myself, which “pro-” label should I identify myself with?
It’s weird.
yhxw here puts it nicely as to why I don’t find the terms very useful and informative. Divisive was not the proper adjective to use.
Anyone who is truly pro-life should also support all methods of reducing abortions, including sex-education and wide availability of contraception. Unfortunately, and especially when religion is involved, that’s very often not the case.
How is the term pro-choice limiting and divisive? It’s a legitimate description of the position, which is being in favor of the woman’s right to choose.
Anti-abortion is much more accurate than pro-life.
JEDIT: See also Ryan’s post.
I am truly pro life and support all those other things you said. You have to remember Frink that I am not your typical conservative and religion means nothing to me considering the fact that I am an atheist.
Source on the 2.5% figure?
Glad you asked. Go to the end of this webpage and in the summary/conclusion of the study they compile a general table with the reasons and when you add together the percentages for rape, incest, affecting the mothers life, affecting the fetus’ life, it comes out to 2.5 %.
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html
Anyone who is truly pro-life should also support all methods of reducing abortions, including sex-education and wide availability of contraception. Unfortunately, and especially when religion is involved, that’s very often not the case.
Agreed wholeheartedly. Sex-ed should start (and cover birth control) around about sixth grade IMHO. Most, if not all, of the parents who are opposed to their children being exposed to this do not educate their own children on sex.
Anti-abortion is much more accurate than pro-life.
I tend to say pro- and anti-abortion.
The Person in Question
More in the Google manifesto saga:
Alphabet Inc.’s Google has fired an employee who wrote an internal memo blasting the web company’s diversity policies, creating a firestorm across Silicon Valley.
James Damore, the Google engineer who wrote the note, confirmed his dismissal in an email, saying that he had been fired for “perpetuating gender stereotypes.” A Google representative didn’t immediately return a request for comment.
Google’s Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai sent a note to employees on Monday that said portions of the employee’s memo “violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.” But he didn’t say if the company was taking action against the employee.
More in the Google manifesto saga:
Alphabet Inc.’s Google has fired an employee who wrote an internal memo blasting the web company’s diversity policies, creating a firestorm across Silicon Valley.
James Damore, the Google engineer who wrote the note, confirmed his dismissal in an email, saying that he had been fired for “perpetuating gender stereotypes.” A Google representative didn’t immediately return a request for comment.
Google’s Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai sent a note to employees on Monday that said portions of the employee’s memo “violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.” But he didn’t say if the company was taking action against the employee.
Looks like his criticisms of Google being an ideological echo chamber were, in fact, accurate.
Anyone who is truly pro-life should also support all methods of reducing abortions, including sex-education and wide availability of contraception. Unfortunately, and especially when religion is involved, that’s very often not the case.
How is the term pro-choice limiting and divisive? It’s a legitimate description of the position, which is being in favor of the woman’s right to choose.
Anti-abortion is much more accurate than pro-life.
JEDIT: See also Ryan’s post.
I am truly pro life and support all those other things you said. You have to remember Frink that I am not your typical conservative and religion means nothing to me considering the fact that I am an atheist.
Yeah I know, the first part wasn’t directed at you.
There is one legitimate problem with the terms “pro-choice” and “pro-life”: They cause confusion. I myself sometimes mix up the two terms. Everybody likes life, and everybody likes choice. I know my opinion on the issue but sometimes have to ask myself, which “pro-” label should I identify myself with?
It’s weird.
That is weird. I don’t see how anyone could confuse pro-choice and pro-life.
I tend to say pro- and anti-abortion.
Pro-abortion is misleading and inflammatory. It goes again to the idea that the left wants lots and lots of abortions, which is flat out wrong.
Pro-life and pro-abortion are both right-wing distortions.
What about pro and anti-choice?
I tend to say pro- and anti-abortion.
Pro-abortion is misleading and inflammatory. It goes again to the idea that the left wants lots and lots of abortions, which is flat out wrong.
Pro-life and pro-abortion are both right-wing distortions.
It could also go to the idea that the left wants abortions for anyone that wants them (apparently regardless of their reasoning). That tends to be the sentiment behind the rabidly pro-choice demonstrators you see at places like the Women’s March, much like the pro-life extreme of being opposed to even the morning after pill. As for pro-life being a rightwing distortion, I don’t necessarily see how. It’s technically accurate.
The Person in Question
There is one legitimate problem with the terms “pro-choice” and “pro-life”: They cause confusion. I myself sometimes mix up the two terms. Everybody likes life, and everybody likes choice. I know my opinion on the issue but sometimes have to ask myself, which “pro-” label should I identify myself with?
It’s weird.
That is weird. I don’t see how anyone could confuse pro-choice and pro-life.
Keep in mind that I’m not confusing the positions, just the labels. It’s two pro things. There’s no pro-anti axis to balance yourself on.
More in the Google manifesto saga:
Alphabet Inc.’s Google has fired an employee who wrote an internal memo blasting the web company’s diversity policies, creating a firestorm across Silicon Valley.
James Damore, the Google engineer who wrote the note, confirmed his dismissal in an email, saying that he had been fired for “perpetuating gender stereotypes.” A Google representative didn’t immediately return a request for comment.
Google’s Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai sent a note to employees on Monday that said portions of the employee’s memo “violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.” But he didn’t say if the company was taking action against the employee.
Looks like his criticisms of Google being an ideological echo chamber were, in fact, accurate.
Maybe at the higher, management levels, yes, but at lower levels, I’m sure there’s many like him.
Also, you can sometimes get to a point wheee calling something an echo chamber is ridiculous. For example, if I made a forum where I banned all people who said they were proud eaters of babies, would you call it an ideological echo chamber just because I banned all the baby eaters?
More in the Google manifesto saga:
Alphabet Inc.’s Google has fired an employee who wrote an internal memo blasting the web company’s diversity policies, creating a firestorm across Silicon Valley.
James Damore, the Google engineer who wrote the note, confirmed his dismissal in an email, saying that he had been fired for “perpetuating gender stereotypes.” A Google representative didn’t immediately return a request for comment.
Google’s Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai sent a note to employees on Monday that said portions of the employee’s memo “violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.” But he didn’t say if the company was taking action against the employee.
Looks like his criticisms of Google being an ideological echo chamber were, in fact, accurate.
Maybe at the higher, management levels, yes, but at lower levels, I’m sure there’s many like him.
Also, you can sometimes get to a point wheee calling something an echo chamber is ridiculous. For example, if I made a forum where I banned all people who said they were proud eaters of babies, would you call it an ideological echo chamber just because I banned all the baby eaters?
If there were in fact baby eaters who were banned, then yes it is an echo chamber on that issue.
Another Slate Star Codex article, and the author is almost certainly a white male heavily steeped in computer science, but it has graphs and things that I quite appreciate: https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exaggerated-differences/
You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)
More in the Google manifesto saga:
Alphabet Inc.’s Google has fired an employee who wrote an internal memo blasting the web company’s diversity policies, creating a firestorm across Silicon Valley.
James Damore, the Google engineer who wrote the note, confirmed his dismissal in an email, saying that he had been fired for “perpetuating gender stereotypes.” A Google representative didn’t immediately return a request for comment.
Google’s Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai sent a note to employees on Monday that said portions of the employee’s memo “violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.” But he didn’t say if the company was taking action against the employee.
Looks like his criticisms of Google being an ideological echo chamber were, in fact, accurate.
Maybe at the higher, management levels, yes, but at lower levels, I’m sure there’s many like him.
Also, you can sometimes get to a point wheee calling something an echo chamber is ridiculous. For example, if I made a forum where I banned all people who said they were proud eaters of babies, would you call it an ideological echo chamber just because I banned all the baby eaters?
If there were in fact baby eaters who were banned, then yes it is an echo chamber on that issue.
Ok, sure, it technically is an echo chamber on that issue. But I don’t want baby eaters on my forum. Some voices are ok not to allow.
Another Slate Star Codex article, and the author is almost certainly a white male heavily steeped in computer science, but it has graphs and things that I quite appreciate: https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exaggerated-differences/
Yes, I appreciate graphs too but I don’t appreciate this sort of bro culture pseudo-science nonsense.
More in the Google manifesto saga:
Alphabet Inc.’s Google has fired an employee who wrote an internal memo blasting the web company’s diversity policies, creating a firestorm across Silicon Valley.
James Damore, the Google engineer who wrote the note, confirmed his dismissal in an email, saying that he had been fired for “perpetuating gender stereotypes.” A Google representative didn’t immediately return a request for comment.
Google’s Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai sent a note to employees on Monday that said portions of the employee’s memo “violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.” But he didn’t say if the company was taking action against the employee.
Looks like his criticisms of Google being an ideological echo chamber were, in fact, accurate.
Maybe at the higher, management levels, yes, but at lower levels, I’m sure there’s many like him.
Also, you can sometimes get to a point wheee calling something an echo chamber is ridiculous. For example, if I made a forum where I banned all people who said they were proud eaters of babies, would you call it an ideological echo chamber just because I banned all the baby eaters?
If there were in fact baby eaters who were banned, then yes it is an echo chamber on that issue.
Ok, sure, it technically is an echo chamber on that issue. But I don’t want baby eaters on my forum. Some voices are ok not to allow.
Goodbye, First Amendment, it was fun while it lasted.
More in the Google manifesto saga:
Alphabet Inc.’s Google has fired an employee who wrote an internal memo blasting the web company’s diversity policies, creating a firestorm across Silicon Valley.
James Damore, the Google engineer who wrote the note, confirmed his dismissal in an email, saying that he had been fired for “perpetuating gender stereotypes.” A Google representative didn’t immediately return a request for comment.
Google’s Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai sent a note to employees on Monday that said portions of the employee’s memo “violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.” But he didn’t say if the company was taking action against the employee.
Looks like his criticisms of Google being an ideological echo chamber were, in fact, accurate.
Maybe at the higher, management levels, yes, but at lower levels, I’m sure there’s many like him.
Also, you can sometimes get to a point wheee calling something an echo chamber is ridiculous. For example, if I made a forum where I banned all people who said they were proud eaters of babies, would you call it an ideological echo chamber just because I banned all the baby eaters?
If there were in fact baby eaters who were banned, then yes it is an echo chamber on that issue.
Ok, sure, it technically is an echo chamber on that issue. But I don’t want baby eaters on my forum. Some voices are ok not to allow.
Another Slate Star Codex article, and the author is almost certainly a white male heavily steeped in computer science, but it has graphs and things that I quite appreciate: https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exaggerated-differences/
Yes, I appreciate graphs too but I don’t appreciate this sort of bro culture pseudo-science nonsense.
You determined that it was ‘pseudo-science nonsense’ from nine minutes of reading?
I’m not a trained scientist, so I rely on summaries like this in order to make up my mind about highly complicated topics. Not being a computer scientist, I don’t have a horse in the race. It just makes sense that women and men have differing interests, and this can have an effect on the type of job one gets. Are we a bunch of horrible fascist sexists because the vast majority of the people on this forum are male? Sure a few give the many a bad name, but I hope that we are given more credit than that.
You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)
More in the Google manifesto saga:
Alphabet Inc.’s Google has fired an employee who wrote an internal memo blasting the web company’s diversity policies, creating a firestorm across Silicon Valley.
James Damore, the Google engineer who wrote the note, confirmed his dismissal in an email, saying that he had been fired for “perpetuating gender stereotypes.” A Google representative didn’t immediately return a request for comment.
Google’s Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai sent a note to employees on Monday that said portions of the employee’s memo “violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.” But he didn’t say if the company was taking action against the employee.
Looks like his criticisms of Google being an ideological echo chamber were, in fact, accurate.
Maybe at the higher, management levels, yes, but at lower levels, I’m sure there’s many like him.
Also, you can sometimes get to a point wheee calling something an echo chamber is ridiculous. For example, if I made a forum where I banned all people who said they were proud eaters of babies, would you call it an ideological echo chamber just because I banned all the baby eaters?
If there were in fact baby eaters who were banned, then yes it is an echo chamber on that issue.
Some voices are ok not to allow.
Why not?
More in the Google manifesto saga:
Alphabet Inc.’s Google has fired an employee who wrote an internal memo blasting the web company’s diversity policies, creating a firestorm across Silicon Valley.
James Damore, the Google engineer who wrote the note, confirmed his dismissal in an email, saying that he had been fired for “perpetuating gender stereotypes.” A Google representative didn’t immediately return a request for comment.
Google’s Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai sent a note to employees on Monday that said portions of the employee’s memo “violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.” But he didn’t say if the company was taking action against the employee.
Looks like his criticisms of Google being an ideological echo chamber were, in fact, accurate.
Maybe at the higher, management levels, yes, but at lower levels, I’m sure there’s many like him.
Also, you can sometimes get to a point wheee calling something an echo chamber is ridiculous. For example, if I made a forum where I banned all people who said they were proud eaters of babies, would you call it an ideological echo chamber just because I banned all the baby eaters?
If there were in fact baby eaters who were banned, then yes it is an echo chamber on that issue.
Ok, sure, it technically is an echo chamber on that issue. But I don’t want baby eaters on my forum. Some voices are ok not to allow.
Goodbye, First Amendment, it was fun while it lasted.
My forum would not be the government of the United States. If the baby eaters want to talk, the government of the United States should allow them to have their own website. But I am in no way obligated to have them on my website.
If I were running a coffee shop, and I decide to kick out a couple of people that were talking about eating babies, would that be a violation of free speech? I think not. The baby eaters can talk in their own homes, or on the street. Just not in my coffee shop.