I'll be sure to regurgitate those posts here in the near future as they're not going to get much more exposure where they currently reside anyway.

On the other hand, it is likewise incorrect generally to think that we are ‘anti-choice’ or ‘anti-abortion’, because we’re neither. First, no pro-lifer thinks that women should be stripped of reproductive choices; we do think that women should have such choices but we think those choices should (a) give primacy to the weight of morality above that of convenience, (b) be properly and fully informed, and (c) be made between the woman, her physician, and her husband! (That last one may strike some people as controversial, but I am strongly and viciously opposed to the systematic eradication of the father’s reproductive and parental rights.) Second, no pro-lifer thinks that abortion should be universally illegal; we are merely opposed to elective abortions, those performed for gratuitous reasons unrelated to the mother’s life being in jeopardy (which comprise a staggering 93% of all abortions [1]), most especially late-term abortions.

I also think they are being misleading (and probably intentionally) when they call themselves ‘pro-choice’ because it’s inescapably obvious to anyone with a functioning brain that it’s always one specific choice they ardently champion: abortion. (Nothing brings this fact home more clearly than the ongoing undercover sting operations into Planned Parenthood clinics.) This is why they should boldly identify themselves as ‘pro-abortion’—because they are. And why not? Since they think abortion is nothing but a specific medical procedure, and since the unborn is nothing more significant than a collection of biological matter, they have no real reason to shy away from labelling themselves ‘pro-abortion’. After all, it is our side, not theirs, that paints the term with strong moral weight; why do they so easily and willingly concede to us the moral high ground? Why do they in one breath assert that the unborn is nothing but a biological clump, while in the next breath say that the decision to have an abortion is difficult and distressing one for a woman to make? Hint: their inconsistency proves that their God-given conscience is still functioning; on some level they are loath to acknowledge, they actually know better.

Sorry for the rant. The abortion issue, given contemporary culture and laws, really gets me hot under the collar.

1. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 7% of all abortions performed are for reasons of rape or incest or health risks regarding either the mother or child, while 93% of them are performed for social reasons (the child is unwanted or inconvenient).

Similarly it could be argued that we (i.e. pro-lifers) are guilty of the same when we tell pro-choice advocates that they're really just pro-abortion advocates dressed up in postmodern semantics, to which many of them object. And why? Well one of the laws of moral relativism states that I personally can be “pro-life” even though I think that other parents ought to have the right to choose whether or not to abort their own babies. Or to put it another way, I personally think it's wrong to murder people, but if other people want to murder then that's up to them… hmm?

Good post!