Language and Contradictions
I've been thinking recently about the tendency of some people to use language which contradicts their position. This should not be. You have the whole debate over whether some guy who blows himself up along with a bunch of Israelis, or Iraqis, is a suicide bomber or a homicide bomber. You also have a battle over how to describe people who believe abortion is murder. Whether you call them pro-life or anti-abortion often reveals your own perspective on the issue.
The point is not to argue the abortion issue. But regardless of your position, I am interested by the way people naturally describe the unborn. "I'm having a baby." "I'm having a boy or girl." "I have three children, with another on the way." "I'm expecting a baby/child."
While the anti-abortion/pro-life side is quick to point out the contradiction in pro-abortioners talking about an unborn child as a "baby" when it kicks or gurgles in the womb or whatever if it's only a fetus, I have heard little discussion about the contradictory language those who want to protect the unborn use. Why don't they classify the unborn among their children? It shouldn't be "I have three kids and am expecting another," but "I have four kids, one of whom is still inside me." It shouldn't be "I'm expecting another baby," but "I have another baby. You will see it in 7 months" (or whenever the due date is). Not using such language only plays into the hands of those who argue the unborn are worth less inside the womb than out. If those who believe that life begins at conception are to be consistent with their beliefs, their use of language in describing the unborn ought to change.
The point is not to argue the abortion issue. But regardless of your position, I am interested by the way people naturally describe the unborn. "I'm having a baby." "I'm having a boy or girl." "I have three children, with another on the way." "I'm expecting a baby/child."
While the anti-abortion/pro-life side is quick to point out the contradiction in pro-abortioners talking about an unborn child as a "baby" when it kicks or gurgles in the womb or whatever if it's only a fetus, I have heard little discussion about the contradictory language those who want to protect the unborn use. Why don't they classify the unborn among their children? It shouldn't be "I have three kids and am expecting another," but "I have four kids, one of whom is still inside me." It shouldn't be "I'm expecting another baby," but "I have another baby. You will see it in 7 months" (or whenever the due date is). Not using such language only plays into the hands of those who argue the unborn are worth less inside the womb than out. If those who believe that life begins at conception are to be consistent with their beliefs, their use of language in describing the unborn ought to change.
posted by redsoxwinthisyear at 8:46 PM
5 Comments:
The comment about the language of "expecting" is very interesting and I may have to revise some of the ways I talk about pregnancies to be more accurate.
On the other hand, I am a big stickler for not describing myself as "pro-life" (I am "anti-abortion") and I don't use the term "baby" either.
Granted there is a sense in which "baby" can mean simply "child", but more commonly and more accurately it refers to infancy -- a distinct stage in human life.
Human beings are embryos, then human beings are fetuses, then human beings are infants (babies), then human beings are children, adolescents, adults, etcetera etcetera.
I have a strong preference for referring to a human being between the time of conception and cell differentiation as a human "embryo" (or better yet as an "embryonic human"), as a "fetus" between the time of cell differentiation and birth, and as a "baby" or "infant" only between the time of birth and toddlerhood.
That is why I don't like to refer to unborn children as "babies" -- it isn't because I want to deny their full status as human beings, but because I want to note and affirm their status as human beings going through an important stage in human growth and development.
As for why I insist on "anti-abortion" -- this is partly just a protest against the changing of names for propoganda value, but more importantly because the term "pro-life" is an ambiguous one.
To many people "pro-life" is simply a position on abortion (and is thus synonymous with "anti-abortion"), but to many others, it is a broader category that takes a certain side on a wide range of issues involving human life.
"Pro-life" has thus come to mean not only a position against abortion, but also against stem-cell research, against both active and (in some cases as in the Schiavo controversy) passive euthanasia, against capital punishment, against all war, etcetera.
As I am only against a couple of the things on that list, I do not describe myself as "pro-life", which is in any case a very vague and ambiguous feel-good term that no one would ever want to disagree with if encountered in isolation (who ever describes themselves as "anti-life"?). I am opposed to the practice of human abortions, therefore I am "anti-abortion"... period.
Labels do not have to be mutually exclusive either.
Some people are both anti-abortion and pro-life. Good for them, they can accept either label as the mood suits them.
I can also recognize that detonating explosives on your person in a crowded area is both an act of suicide and homocide. Fine. This act can then be categorized legitimately as a "suicide bombing," a "homocide bombing", or even as a "suicide killing" depending on which aspect (suicide, homocide, or use of explosives) you wanted to emphasize in a two-word description.
Well explained, isaac. Although technically the unborn may not be babies, realistically we're probably not ever going to get people to stop referring to them as such. Conceding that fact, I still think there's a need to be more precise in use of language (even if not as precise as you just detailed. I think you broke a record for longest comment on my blog!)
So, soxwinthisyear, do you have a baby inside YOU? (Or should I ask, do you have a fetus inside you?)
I was once an embryonic human . . . I kind of like that. It sounds important.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Hmmm...
How often do you use only a developmental term to describe a member of your family? Sure, my family includes an adolescent male, but that's hardly the most important thing about him. He's a child of God, he's my mother's child, and he's my brother.
Though developmental terms like "fetus" or "adolescent" are useful for medical charts and other technical settings, they hardly conjure up warm feelings for the person who is being talked about.
Since our enemy (and I mean our enemy in a spiritual sense) is perfectly aware of the power of words, and since the word "fetus" has been used in the past with de-humanizing effect, throwing in warm familial terms like "baby" seem to be a practical solution.
Post a Comment
<< Home