Now that the issues of women’s reproductive rights have come to the forefront in the 2012 Presidential election, it’s time to re-examine how the mainstream media continues to succumb to the position of the extreme right on these issues. Specifically, I’m referring to their choice of terminology. The media use the term “pro-life” to describe the anti-abortion partisans. The term is inappropriate and misleading.
Use of “pro-life” implies that those of us who support women are somehow “anti-life.” Let’s examine the policies that the so-called “pro-life” right wing supports, either implicitly or explicitly:
If the policies of the so-called “pro-life” folks are enacted, women will go back to having back-alley abortions or self-medicating to terminate unwanted pregnancies. If forced to carry to term, some will abandon their babies, putting infants in peril. Women and children will die from “pro-life” policies.
Not all people who oppose abortion are from the right-wing fringe. Some people oppose abortion on religious grounds. So to them, I say, don’t get an abortion. But keep your religion out of my government.
In general, those who oppose abortions due to the “sanctity of life” argument support unnecessary wars and the death penalty. Those are things that belie the “pro-life” moniker. And if someone is in favor of free access to assault weapons or limiting medical care for those who can’t afford it, they can’t be “pro-life” at the same time.
So it’s time for the so-called “liberal media” to tell the truth. People like Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are not “pro-life”. They are “anti-abortion” and should be described that way.