From SourceWatch
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Hmm - while I confess that I don't know the exact origins of the terms I'm not persuaded that the primary motivation of coining either term was to position the opposition in the negative (though I suspect that was a secondary benefit). I suspect the primary motive was to coin a term that was a positive self-description that would be embraced by respective supporters but also be appealing to the unaligned. (I suspect that before "pro-life" and "pro-choice" become commonly accepted the use of "pro-abortion" and "anti-abortion" were more commonly used -- though I'm not sure whether they started out as self-descriptors or media allocated tags) -- bob

I'm going to make the same comment I made to the Pro-choice discussion page:

Not all those who call themselves "pro-life" favor "life" in all other public issues. In particular, relatively few are pacifists across the board.

This seems like a broad, vague assumption. I would suggest either adding details, facts, quotes or removing it. It's a good bet that there's been some study done on the "framing" aspect of such a high-profile, divisive issue, so why not use it? -- Diane

I like this. Sorry, I'm the anonymous guy who wrote the first entry in pro-life and pro-choice, and I wrote them to be as identical as possible. It seems that trend has been kept up and thus prevented a propaganda war.