One thing that annoys me- "The debate over the emotional impact of abortion is a contentious one, with pro-choice and anti-abortion advocates not surprisingly having very different views of the issue."
Why does it have to be pro-choice, but anti-abortion? WHY can't the writer just write pro-life? We're not against choice- people have plenty of choice regarding NOT having intercourse and being responsible in their actions. We're against murder.
So here pro-lifers are being labeled in a negative way- "anti-choice". NO- we're the pro- ones. PRO-LIFE. Pro-choicers are just anti-life. Anti-unborn people's-rights. Anti-health for the mother.
On a more positive note, the article did slightly stress the negative impacts of abortions.
"At five years, both groups had few intrusive thoughtsSurprising? Not one bit. How much else do we need for a clear message that abortion is wrong is so many ways?! Killing your unborn baby does not take away ANY problems- this article even contributes to show it may cause more. Society would be better off in full if abortion did not exist.
about the event. But the women who had abortions were seven times as likely to
report that they actively avoided thinking about it.
When compared with the
general population, women who had abortions had higher anxiety scores at all
measured time points -- from 10 days after the pregnancy termination to five
years later. Women who had miscarriages had higher than normal anxiety scores at
only one of the measured time points -- 10 days after their pregnancy
ended."
2 comments:
It's actually prohibited by the Associated Press stylebook (which is the standard for news reporting) to use "pro-life" instead of "anti-abortion." Pro-lifers are just about the only group of people whom the stylebook refuses to call by the name they prefer.
Wow. I didn't know that.
Isn't that a bit too much like discrimination for such a liberal group?
Post a Comment