Anti-abortion framing: is it really a bad thing?

We’ve all heard it: ‘You’re not pro-life…you’re just anti-abortion’.

It’s the age old tactic of negative framing: emphasising truths or words that have negative connotations so as to frame the opposition in a bad light.

It’s an attempt to position one side on the path to social failure, all before the discussion has even begun.

Pro-abortion campaigners, by taking the name ‘pro-choice’ - and calling their opponents anti-abortion - have categorised their opponents as being anti-choice.

The pro-life campaign has, justifiably, protested this negative framing for years.

But have we protested too long?

Are we fighting a losing battle?

And, is this even a distinction we should be making?

Are we just as guilty of ‘framing the argument’?

After all, our dedicated protestation of the term ‘anti-abortion’ is somewhat ironic considering our use of the term pro-life.

Although I doubt many of us would call pro-choicers ‘anti-life’, by calling ourselves ‘pro-life’ we are to some extent taking part in this framing tactic: if we’re pro-life, then the other side must necessarily be anti-life.

So, is it wrong to use framing tactics to present our cause in a more favourable light?

I believe that as long as the framing is based in reality and doesn’t negate key facts of the matter, then framing is merely a form of persuasion and can be a useful and justifiable tool.

The key is to ensure we are telling the truth to the best of our ability.

The conflict between life and choice

The pro-choice campaign is anti-life in that it elevates a woman’s right to choose over another human’s right to live.

It places greater import on freedom and autonomy that on the right to exist - the right to live.

It could be said that the right to life is meaningless without the right to freedom and the right to choose.

I agree, in part.

However, the right to freedom or choice is entirely inconsequential if one does not possess the right to live. Without life, choice means nothing.

Just as we are not categorically ‘anti-choice’, so pro-choicers are not categorically anti-life.

In fact, many of them are motivated by a deep compassion for suffering single women, victims of rape or abuse, or those facing poverty and struggling to come to terms with another unplanned pregnancy.

However, their pursuit of abortion in reality devalues an entire subsection of humanity, relegating them to terminable inconveniences that merely hinder autonomy.

In the pro-choice mindset, an unborn baby is only valuable if it is wanted.

Thus it is not their humanity or their individual worth that gives them value but simply an ambiguous and unpredictable perception of ‘wantedness’.

Human rights are transformed into ‘social rights’, and rather than being intrinsic are gifted to certain individuals almost on a whim.

Since when did fundamental human rights find their basis in whether society ‘wants’ that human being or not?

Pro-choicer’s are not really pro-choice categorically: they’re pro the choice to access abortion.

The choice of the father, wider family members, or the child in question are irrelevant to the discussion: the woman’s right to choose must trump all others.

Whereas, being pro-life means to be pro all life: from conception to death; born and unborn; planned or unplanned; able-bodied or disabled; male or female; young or old.

So this is why we call ourselves pro-life, and reject the restrictive label ‘anti-abortion’.

Is being anti-abortion really a bad thing?

However, I think we’ve gone too far in our rejection of the term ‘anti-abortion’. For once, I actually side with the pro-abortion group on this subject.

Hear me out.

Yes the term anti-abortion focuses hearers immediately on what we’re against, not what we’re for.

I do agree that this is a potential problem.

But the reality is that, because we are pro-life, we are also anti-abortion.

To be anti injustice is not an inherently negative thing.

I am proud to be anti-torture, anti-human-trafficking, anti-abuse, anti-racism…the list goes on.

Yes I am pro-life.

But I am also staunchly anti-abortion.

I will not be ashamed of being opposed to the torturous and inhumane dismembering of unborn children, or opposed the misinformation and indoctrination that persuades young women that taking the life of their child is just another healthcare procedure.

To be anti-abortion is to be anti-injustice, and if that is what the media and pro-abortion critics want to label me, I will happily wear that as a badge of honour.

Accuracy, Advocacy, and Anti-Abortion Activism

As pro-lifers, our duty is to protect life first and foremost.

This means that we must be passionately anti-abortion.

Yes, we have tried to fight back against this negative framing that highlights what we oppose instead of accepting our foundational motivation for that opposition - our love for life and our desire to see it protected in our country.

However, now I believe we should somewhat accept this terminology and proudly wear the label ‘anti-abortion’.

It is accurate, it clearly shows where we stand on this issue, and it distinguishes what - not who - we are opposing.

Our fight is not against desperate women seeking abortions, but against the doctors carrying out these fatal procedures and the politicians and influencers who are promoting indoctrination that negates the brutal reality of abortion and it's mental, emotional, and life-terminating ramifications.

We are anti-abortion because we love life, and that life includes the women, the unborn, and all those affected by the tragic injustice of abortion.

And although we oppose those promoting abortion ideology and the abortionists themselves, we must remember that no-one is so far gone that the saving gospel of God cannot redeem them.

Saving lives - here and in eternity

No sin - not even murder - is so heinous that Christ’s blood cannot pay the cost it rightly incurs.

We are no better than the worst sinner.

We are all fallen and deserving of God’s judgement, and yet He showed us mercy, gave his life for ours, and redeemed us despite our deepest sins.

The One who showed us undeserved grace us is also the One who offers salvation to all, including abortionists, those who have pressured women into seeking abortions, and the women themselves.

In trying to save the lives of the unborn, our highest aim must be to also share the hope of the gospel that saved our own lives - for it is only the gospel that can truly redeem society and eternally save lives.

Without the foundation of the gospel, we risk creating a moralistic but spiritually dead culture that adheres to biblical values and yet rejects the Creator of those values.

And so, as fierce as our opposition of abortion is, our kindness and compassion (caring holistically for their lives, from conception into eternity, physical and spiritual) for our fellow humans must be stronger still.