The debate over vaccinations has been in the news recently. As I perused the scholarly thoughts of the iY generation on Tumblr, I stumbled across this:
Can you tell this was from Tumblr? Lol!
So how does the issue of your choice to vaccinate your children compare to your choice on the issue of abortion?
Are we comparing apples to apples or apples to oranges?
The left aim to halt any and all pro-choice debates by comparing one issue of choice to another: You’re either pro-choice in all issues or are a hypocritical republican that only believes in your pro-choice issues. Must one be “pro-choice” in all issues in order to truly be pro-choice?
In trying to understand liberals’ debate on pro-choice I asked myself, “Must one give up their religious beliefs in order to be pro-choice?”, “What if you aren’t religious yet still believe abortion is wrong?”, “Why do liberals support their choices while disparaging a different point of view?”. (Okay, we do the same thing, too. At least we don’t try to shut down the debate.)
Abortion is not going away: Roe v. Wade is the law of the land and will never be repealed. Why is it inappropriate for one to fight for those who have no voice? And how does one support the choice to have an abortion that is based solely on the sex of the baby?
As the left apply the term “pro-choice” to other issues, what exactly is the definition of “pro-choice”? From various on-line dictionaries:
- Thefreedictionary.com: Favoring legalized abortion as an option for an unwanted pregnancy.
- Merriam-webster.com: Believing that pregnant women should have the right to choose to have an abortion
- Dictionary.reference.com: Supporting or advocating legalized abortion.
- Wikipedia: Pro-choice is the position which advocates the existence of a woman’s right to choose whether to have an abortion.
So the definitions from these dictionaries all relate to abortion yet it is now applied to every other societal issue, especially if it proves that evil republicans are hypocrites.
Let’s take a look at some other “pro-choice” control issues that liberals support, shall we?
- Soda: No soda larger than 16 ounces for you!
- Salt: “We remove your temptation!”
- Obamacare: “Obamacare is the law and people need to accept that!”
- Gun Control: Oops, I mean the “gun safety” movement.
- School lunches: “Eventually schools will be filled with children who never knew meals that did not conform to new nutritional standards.”
Isn’t the de facto definition of pro-choice imply that you are inherently “in favor of” or “supporting of” your right to choose which side of an issue you wish to support?
Then why do liberals use personal choices against us?
- To make a political point. Just look at homosexual marriage - how many states actually had voters approve it and how many had court activists/state politicians make it legal.
- To prove that republicans are hypocritical. You’re pro-choice but want to cut funds for women and children! Republicans want to force every woman who is pregnant to give birth to their child, but when the woman does the Republican support is nowhere to be found. You’re pro-choice but support the death penalty! Republicans talk about “personal responsibility,” but they should follow their own words instead of hiding behind loopholes and lobbyist to collect more money! You get the idea. Straw man arguments.
- To make you distrust your own choice. If you don’t tow the line, you are a racist, homophobe, religious zealot who hates people not like you.
No matter what side you end up on a particular issue, you are still making a choice, a personal choice. It is your choice to defend it, stand up for your beliefs, and explain your reasoning for that decision.
Course those bleeding heart liberals, as welcoming as they are with their broad minds, would support a person’s right to their choice. And I bet they are proud of it!
DCG
