Why have we accepted and adopted the use of *Pro-life* for the Anti-choice, often Pro-death RWers

[lib_wit_it]

who want to control women's reproductive self-determination? I was reminded of this as I saw Obamacare being adopted and accepted by the Obama admin. That I understand. I conflates Obama with care. Not a problem. Maybe they would have been wise to have introduced it themselves.

However, by capitulating to the demand of Anti-choice, often Pro-death RWers to refer to them as Pro-choice, we have become part of the lie. I guess we called them Anti-choice for a while, but eventually gave in. I think we should rechristen them. Maybe "Anti-choice", or maybe you have a better idea.

If only we had the discipline of the RW in their marketing of ideas, our leaders would be more proactive in this way and progressive causes would benefit. Where is our Frank Luntz? He can't be the only one who can do what he does.

[Humanist_Activist]

1. Pro-Coat Hanger, seems to fit, they obviously don't give to shits about women's health or rights.

They would prefer that women seeking abortions bleed out in a back alley somewhere, it would serve them right, according to these ingrates.

[silverweb]

2. Many of us already do reject the "pro-life" label.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]We've been calling them "anti-choice" for years already.

It's the anti-choice organizations and the media who have pushed the "pro-life" label, even though it's a misnomer. It's up to us to push back rather than accept their terminology, and we obviously haven't had enough people doing that.

[lib_wit_it]

5. You're right. Not enough push back. I barely ever hear or read "anti-choice" anymore, even among

progressives. I don't think progressives recognize the power of the RW propaganda machine, or at least don't do enough to counteract it.

[freshwest]

3. Not just on this issue, but many, the right supports big government. Call them 'big gummint folk.'

Because they are into having all of us pay for their 'unfunded mandates,' like the transvaginal ultrasounds, DHS, TSA and all the other intrusions into our lives. Toss all of their memes back at them, again and again until the spell is broken.

[lib_wit_it]

6. Exactly. And let's not forget perhaps the biggest unfunded mandate of all--the Bush Wars. As Jon

Stewart said recently--(paraphrasing) You guys pay for the wars and oil subsidies and I'll pick up the contraception bill.

[freshwest]

11. Obama knew this, but they NEVER bring it up:

Note the figures. Think about what is happening to our nation, district by district. He says, 'The only reason these statistics don't show up, it we've been borrowing from China to pay for this war. We're running up a credit card on our children...'

The GOP knew this. As the costs for the war in Iraq, their excuses got wilder and wilder, saying how we would actually profit from the sale of Iraqi Oil and clear the deficit. Then they spun through their media lapdogs, that it wasn't a big portion of the budget and wasn't going to hurt Americans. The figures in the video below show that lie to be what it is and the GOP keeps whining about the deficit and demanding cuts. And the Dittohead faithful whine about their kids and grandkids being saddled with debt by all the welfare queens, etc. The debt they said didn't mean anything, all of a sudden it does. Outright lies.

They want to starve us out and destroy the planet, but they never talk about the chief cause of the deficit:

http://costofwar.com/en/

[lib_wit_it]

14. Darn, company showed up early. Must go, but I will check out the vid later. Thanks for posting.

[Riftaxe]

4. It's pure propaganda much like

pro-choice is. If someone feels the need to be intellectually dishonest with others or even themselves over labels, they probably have no business even discussing an issue like abortion.

I am firmly pro-abortion, people against it's availability are anti-abortion it really gets no simpler then that.

[lib_wit_it]

8. I see your point, but I'm not sure I totally agree. Some people who are pro-choice are themselves

against abortion. They don't like it, and they wouldn't do it, but they don't believe it is their right to stop others from having abortions. They are for others having the choice.

[Rex]

7. No idea...they are NOT pro-life in any way, shape or form.

Iraq should be a perfect example of that.

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

9. Well, I think it's a matter of the media's choice.

To name something as "anti" doesn't inherently allow one to name oneself. I think the media defers to what each side prefers to call itself. So the right would like to call you "anti-life," but the media won't allow for this. Nor will it allow "anti-choice" as a label. naming something as "anti" gives precedence to the other side.

This, of course, is bullshit, and one can make a strong argument for an objective standard in media labeling. Your position actually has strong support, since the law, objectively speaking, is predicated upon the woman's right to choose. Since this is the law of the land, then, really, you're right, they should be labeled "anti-choice." But you know how the media desires to be "objective," which means allowing for sides to dictate their narrative. You'd think that a profession which desires to be objective could at least have this as a basic standard--name things as the laws name them, since we are a country driven primarily by laws.

In many ways, I understand that I should be called "anti-death-penalty" since it is the law of the land. Fair enough. I guess I'd prefer being called "pro-life" in this instance, or "pro-human dignity," or "pro-human-person." Etc. "Anti-murder" or "anti-revenge" would be great, but this ain't happening.

[lib_wit_it]

12. That has a lot to do with it, the media respecting self-naming. However, I don't think that is the

rule in all cases. "Obamacare" was used by some media outlets even before the admin embraced it, at least in some cases. And even the "so-called" distinction often used with it allowed that name to be propagated.

Also, your idea that the name should be based on the related law, is reasonable, but not the only reasonable approach. I don't see what's wrong with Anti-Death-Penalty, but it doesn't have the ring of a good marketing decision. As I said, the Democratic Party and progressive leadership needs to take this sort of thing seriously and hire people to manage the branding.

I've got more thoughts on this, but company has arrived. Maybe later...

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

15. Of course there are exceptions to the rule, all rules.

I'm not even arguing for an "ought" with regards to a universal rule. I'm just trying to find a general pattern, especially since the media would most likely be heavily pro-choice. I really have no argument with your post here.

"Obamacare" is an easy shorthand, and there is no legal position at this point. I don't think the administration should be embarrassed to call it Obamacare; if they are embarrassed to have their name attached, well, then. . . . Remember, we do have the "Bush doctrine," which we see as an insult, and they see as a good thing.

One you get into the whole "marketing" approach, well, we're back to square one. There is a battle over how the media helps in spreading our "product."

I was just thinking about a clear objective way to help the media to label issues (or to accept labels). So one has to be "anti-war" if war has been declared. However, if war has not been declared, or the issue is being debated, then clearly one can be fairly labeled "pro-peace."

[HockeyMom]

10. ProBIRTH

because if they really were pro-life they would care what happened AFTER birth, from newborn to old age. They don't what happens after labor until old age and death.

[lib_wit_it]

13. Great points!

[ljm2002]

16. *Forced Birth*

That is the only issue of life and death that concerns them at all, and it only applies to fetuses. Their only requirement is that once a female has become impregnated, she MUST bring it to term and give birth. No brain? Who cares, let the doctors lie to her about it so she won't immorally decide to abort.

I won't use any other term when describing them.