The True Meaning Behind Their Words

You frequently hear politicians, Planned Parenthood representatives and other members of the abortion industry say, “I’’m not pro-abortion, I’’m pro-choice.”” Then they piously follow up with something like, ““Nobody wants an abortion, but women must have that choice.””

On the surface, this may seem like a reasonable thing to say. Unfortunately, everything isn’’t as it appears on the surface. I looked up the word “choice” in Webster’’s Dictionary. Here’s part of what it said: “the act of choosing: a sufficient number and variety to choose among. Selected with care. Suggests the opportunity or privilege of choosing freely.” That begs the question; does the abortion industry’s “pro-choice” mantra fit the accepted definition? Let’’s take a closer look.

Those who advocate “choice” hold the position that abortion should be legal throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy, for virtually any reason. What’’s the answer for a married couple that feels the time isn’’t just right for a baby? Abortion. What do they say to the young college student who instinctively wants to keep her baby but is being pressured by her boyfriend and parents? Abortion. How about for cosmetic, financial or convenience reasons, or even for selecting the sex of the baby? The answer is tragically the same: abortion.

The abortion industry and its activists have gone on record opposing even the most mainstream legislative protections for unborn babies and their mothers. These laws enjoy the support of 70% or more of Americans.

“Choicers” oppose laws that involve parents in the decision of their minor daughter to have an abortion, whether it is permission or simple notification. They reject the notion that women should be fully informed before undergoing an abortion. The Laci Peterson law that would protect a woman’’s unborn baby from criminal attack is opposed as a backdoor attempt to outlaw all abortion.

In their minds, babies who manage to survive an abortion attempt are not even worthy of legal protection. They oppose legislation protecting minor girls from being transported across state lines for abortion without the parents’’ consent. These situations are frequently the result of a very young girl impregnated by an adult male.

Pro-abortion activists even want to force health care providers to participate in abortion against their will. Choicers oppose legislation that would protect the jobs of those who refuse to perform or assist with the killing of unborn babies.

Perhaps the most egregious position of the pro-abortion crowd is their opposition to ban partial-birth abortion, killing a baby during delivery. Further, choicers have tried but failed to get Congress to use your tax dollars to pay for all of these abortions.

Wouldn’’t those who are self-described pro-choice come to the aid of women forced to have an abortion? Hardly. It is well documented that the government in China brutally enforces a one-child program to combat their rising population. Women have been forcibly dragged to abortion chambers in their ninth month of pregnancy. Many men and women have been sterilized against their will. The lucky ones have fled China, with some coming to America for asylum. The silence from so-called “pro-choice” activists has been deafening.

The abortion crowd even opposes new technology that shines light on life in the womb. Recent developments with three- and four-dimensional ultrasound shows unborn babies moving as early as eight weeks and somersaulting at 12 weeks. Babies have even been observed smiling. Choicers call these pictures “deeply disquieting” and ridicule pro-lifers for “being intoxicated with evidence of a fetus’s’ humanity”.

However, eager new parents have joyously gazed at these remarkable images of their unborn children. The only imaginable reason to deny parents this blissful experience is because a new-found knowledge of fetal life quickly erodes the political advantage of the abortion crowd in the minds of a growing number of Americans. Knowledge is the Achilles Heel of abortion, and Roe vs. Wade is on a collision course with technology.

Let’’s revisit Webster’s definition of “choice”: “the act of choosing: a sufficient number and variety to choose among. Selected with care. Suggests the opportunity or privilege of choosing freely”. Does this describe America’’s so-called “pro-choice” movement? Ironically, it demonstrates exactly what those who promote abortion do not stand for. They don’’t offer a variety of choices. They only offer death, and it’’s often served up with an overbearing attitude. It’’s “my choice or no choice.” Many times the choice isn’’t selected with care or chosen freely. This has become evident by the growing number of American women who say they were pressured or forced into having abortions. Choicers have also revealed their support, by default, of the oppressive forced-abortion Chinese program.

It’’s clear that politicians, the abortion industry and others who promote abortion are not “pro-choice”. They are uncompromisingly and aggressively pro-abortion. It’’s important that pro-lifers articulate this fact to the American public.