The Terminology Is Grotesque... In My Opinion!

Your baby is the size of an orange....

My apologies, your foetal tissue is the size of an orange...


Wouldn't want an emotional pregnant woman.

Let's suppress their emotions, that can't be unhealthy, right?

Pro Choice - How can you Not be? I mean, choice is good, right?

Pro Life - Well, duh. Who the hell is against life?

Patriot Act - No? What are you, some lousy terrorist sympathizer?

No Child Left Behind - Opposed? So, a child hater, eh? Or you're just against education in general?

War on (whatever the 'evil du jour' is)

Control the dialogue and definitions, and you steer the crowd.

This represents about 95% of politics, and always has. Are you familiar with the If By Whiskey speech?

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
I've never seen a documentary/show/film or real life anecdotal ultrasound in which the midwife says "here is your womb, and this part here, is your lovely clump of cells"...

Gross.

You are purposely misconstruing the purpose of clinical terms right now to try to make your point seem more sound, but what you said above isn't the purpose of clinical terms.

Bacon is actually decomposing pig tissue. Let's call it what it is!

It's not a baby when it is a fertilized egg. It is a potential future baby. That's a fact. When exactly does it become a "baby"? That's the million dollar question.

The term "miscarriage" is a layman's term. The proper medical term is spontaneous abortion. Like it or not, that is the official medical term. It is not incorrect.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Clump of cells.

Hmmm.

You won't desensitise me with such wording as much as you try.
It certainly won't move right wingers in the slightest either...

If I use that phrase, that's because of how I think of it. It's not an attempt to desensitize anyone nor change anyone's opinion. If you take me expressing myself as "below the belt", that is on you.

And YOU know that we consider embryos and fetuses as just that, not "babies", yet you continue to use that word. If my language is an attempt to dehumanize, then your language is an attempt to lay a guilt trip.

Basically someone will say "baby parts"...
And the pro choice reply will be "no, it's foetal tissue/cells"...

People have different viewpoints. Call them "baby parts" if you want, I'll call them what I want. How about that for freedom? Well where did that tissue/cells come from? A fetus!

Well I won't kowtow to the PC, & again...
I will not be desensitised...

Good for you! I won't accept the guilt trip either.

Spontaneous abortion
...
To abort is to manually put a stop to something...

Not necessarily "manually". The BODY aborts the fetus. Spontaneous abortion is just another word for miscarriage.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
But PC nowadays though.

YOU are being PC! You are offended by the clinical terms some pro-choice people use, so you want to "humanize" and "soften" the terms! That's political correctness in a nutshell!

a reply to: yeahright

I knew of the fallacy, I didn't know it's name though.

Very interesting.

Overall you are correct, political discourse is filled with it.

I always saw it as appeal to the listener.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

I personally prefer the medical terms being used as opposed to "baby parts" or "chopped up". I know what they are, and i agree that life begins at the point of conception. I think these terms are used to lighten the visual blow, just like "stool sample", "mastectomy", everybody knows these terms and why we use them.
The anti-abortion crowd wants to use these terms for their visual/emotional effect. If i recall, you are vehemently against abortion. This is likely your reasoning as well, even though you might not agree.
For the record, i am pro choice, but i am appalled when i see the large numbers of abortions that are carried out in modern times. "recreational abortion" could be curtailed by educating the importance of the many birth control methods that are available. It really comes down to education. I would like to see and live in a society where abortion is just not needed as much. But i would never want legislation passed that would deny someone the right to choose.


A good conspiracy to search out would be whether abortion clinics such as PP are so prevalent because of the interest in the fetal material.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
YOU are being PC! You are offended by the clinical terms some pro-choice people use, so you want to "humanize" and "soften" the terms! That's political correctness in a nutshell!

QFT! This thread is just an example of conservative leaning PC.

I just had a rather lengthy reply to BH, KS & Kayla...
Then my phone crashed and I'll be damned if I'm gonna type it all out again.


I'll just say I still love you all, but we won't agree.


TL;DR
No guilt trip, not offended yada yada
Just ranting.


Certainly not conservative leaning either, leave politics out of what I personally define as a moral issue please, Krazy.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Yes, we're the "insane" ones.



Who said it was your problem?

Trying to shut down life saving research material that goes towards cutting edge medical research and development all because the practice to obtain the material is "icky" is pretty insane in my book.

I wonder why those that are for abortion are countering this thread?

It's just terminology, right?

We are all free to call it what it is, right?

You can say, "clump of cells".

We can say, "Baby killer".

The truth is with the perception of the act.

You all, who want this, look at it with dispassion.

Our perception of the act is something entirely different.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Awww don't be bitter that you got called out for trying to position a political correctness argument while simultaneously complaining about political correctness. Like it or not, pro-life is a conservative issue. You are pushing political correctness with this thread. Therefore it is conservative leaning political correctness. Pretty simple logical flow there.

a reply to: Woodcarver

Yes Woodcarver exactly, like I said there is other terms I find abhorrent in these discussions and "chopped up" , "dismembered" etc are among those certainly.

That's a definitive appeal to emotion.


Something I've tried to avoid in my rare posts on the topic.



My rant is mainly about readability, I can't read 40 pages of two sides trying to desensitise, dehumanise or over emphasise the debate...
But it's interesting to get people's POVs.

I'm torn really between avoiding them all together, or ranting and feeling a little better about it.
I chose to rant.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

You can take my word for it or go on a verbose tangent about why you must be right...


Oh wait, you already did.
Never mind.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

And we love you too, Charlie. We won't all agree on everything all time, and that's okay. It's what makes the world interesting.

originally posted by: beezzer
I wonder why those that are for abortion are countering this thread?

And yet another PC term. No one is "for abortion". Guilt trip averted.

It's just terminology, right?

We are all free to call it what it is, right?

Absolutely! We're not the ones complaining about your terminology. Read the OP.

You all, who want this, look at it with dispassion.

Not at all true. Guilt trip averted.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

That is my perception.

You are always free to disagree, but I see dispassionate, cold, aloof posts on the subject.

I've resigned myself to the fact that no-one will change any minds.

I accept that and will just call it how I perceive it.

That is the truth as I see it.

You see another truth.

Everyone has filters, has blinders that alter the world we live in.

Some see freedom fighters, some see terorrists.
Some see heroes, some see villians.
Some see preborn infants as life, others see them as "clumps of cells".

I'm comfortable with my perception of reality.

I'm sure you're happy with yours.

a reply to: beezzer

I've seen a lot of passionate posts from the pro-choicers. Passion for women's rights.

I know the pro-lifers say that Margaret Sanger wanted to kill all black people, but that's not the Margaret Sanger I have been reading about. The Margaret Sanger I know was very passionate about freeing women from the burden of having child after child after child. She saw so many women slowly dying from having 6 or 8 or 10 or more children, living in poverty, sometimes alone. She saw those women who felt their only choices were to keep popping out kids and ruin their health, or take another chink out of their humanity by ending their sexuality altogether, to keep from getting pregnant yet again. She wanted them to be free to be sexual beings, just like the men, without having to live with the fear of pregnancy after pregnancy after pregnancy. She was first and foremost, a proponent of education and contraception. She looked at abortion as a viable, but last resort. And she was concerned for ANY woman in poverty, not just black women.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

I promised myself yesterday I would not get involved in another abortion thread.

I had to break that promise to give you this.


I have to LoL at people calling you conservative.

We don't all fit in a box.

We don't always agree but I always respect your opinion.

Carry on soldier.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Sure whatever. Deny the fact that you were creating a PC argument while simultaneously complaining about it. If you don't want to be called a conservative because you don't want to make this a political argument, fine, but know this, YOU started it when you brought up PC in your op.