Thursday is the 36th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion. Pro-choice groups see President Barack Obama as an ally of the Democratic leadership in Congress, and feel that they will likely ease restrictions on federal funding, broaden family-planning programs, and install federal judges who support the right to choose.
Anti-choice activists feel they have taken several political setbacks as a result of the Obama election. They are encouraging the Republican minority to filibuster if necessary.
“The alignment of a hard-core pro-abortion president with pro-abortion Democratic majorities in Congress means that many existing pro-life policies are now in great jeopardy,” said Douglas Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee. “Some damage is inevitable, but the extent to which the Obama abortion agenda will be achieved will depend on the perception of elected policy-makers as to how the public is responding to the proposed changes.”
I find this report’s use of the term Pro-Lifers couched in quotation marks while not doing the same to the term anti-choice to be repugnant. It is improper to suggest that Pro-Lifers are purely anti-choice. Pro-Lifers defend the “pro-choice to live” view of the fetus that otherwise goes ignored. The improper juxtaposition also leaves the impression that pro-abortionists are purely pro-choice when in fact the pro-abortion position allows for the negation of a choice by a fetus as well as the life of that very same fetus. There should be more balance in the reporting; for example, if Pro-Lifers are to be called anti-choice, then advocates of abortion should be called anti-life.