We Asked, You Answered: If someone says “I’m pro-choice, not pro-abortion,” what do you think they mean?
On social media, Secular Pro-Life asked this question regarding the “pro-choice vs. pro-abortion” dilemma: If someone says “I’m pro-choice, not pro-abortion,” what do you think they mean?
Below are some insightful responses that consider the range of opinions in the pro-choice movement, or even the problem of cognitive dissonance (lightly edited for clarity).
Kimberly Ann: Probably the “safe, legal, and rare” crowd
Kate Jenkins: What they probably mean: “I don’t think everyone should have an abortion, I just think people should have a choice.” / What pro-lifers hear: “I am uncomfortable with abortion.”
Mary Flannery Jensen:
- They believe abortion is morally wrong, but they don’t want their views to be legislated.
- They don’t necessarily believe abortion is morally wrong, but they understand that it can be difficult emotionally and would not wish it on anyone.
- They see abortion as morally neutral and not necessarily a difficult decision (the same way they might think of contraception or a simple medical procedure), but they understand that calling oneself “pro-abortion” scares people away and/or they want to emphasize the fact that they support choice first and foremost.
Julie Fletcher: That they are fine with human rights violations as long as it doesn’t affect them.
Sara Solheim Nilsen: [For pro-choice] I guess they mean although it is the pregnant people’s choice and that abortion should be legal, abortion is not a positive thing. They may still think it is sad people choose to abort, but they may view a ban as worse. E.g. if they fear dangerous back-alley abortions, gender inequality and victims of SA. Other finds abortion as a morally neutral choice rather than a positive or negative one.
[Those who are] pro-abortion still think it is the woman’s choice, but they view abortion in a more positive light. E.g. they think it is morally good to abort disabled people because fewer would suffer in a world not accommodating the disabled.
Jim Burke: I ask for clarification, assuming an answer is more likely to be wrong than correct.
C.M.K.: At BEST, they might mean “I think it should be available in dire situations, but people should have to think carefully.” But those who are less well-meaning would then think, “They are ALL dire situations.”
Melba Aguilar: They mean they aren’t actually focused on more fetal deaths as the desirable outcome, they’re focused on individual women using their own discernment. Typically highly focused on-the-edge cases: rape, incest, maternal health, etc.
Freddy Cranks: It means they’re not morally comfortable with either option (abortion or not allowing abortion), so they defer the “choice” to the woman to avoid any moral culpability themselves.
John M. Breen: They are saying “I don’t think abortion is a good thing in its own right, worth pursuing, but it should under certain circumstances be available as an option.” Implicit in this, however, is the judgment that a state of affairs with abortion in it is good—better than one without it.
Samantha: Ideally, it means they don’t advocate for one choice over the other. They likely see the issue with abortion but don’t believe the federal government should hold the power to stop it.
If you appreciate our work and would like to help, one of the most effective ways to do so is to become a monthly donor. You can also give a one time donation here or volunteer with us here.
