Pro-choice caucus deems ‘choice’ as ‘harmful language’ in new messaging protocol

It sounds like the all-Democrat House Pro-Choice Caucus is going through a bit of an existential crisis—they’ve decided their own name is “harmful.”

This bright idea comes in a new staff memo, in which the lawmakers advised Democrats with a list of harmful and helpful language around the abortion issue. The word “choice,” it turns out, should be changed to “decision,” since they say the current language in use tends to harm the pro-abortion cause.

The memo comes in the wake of the leaked draft majority opinion by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, which seems set to overturn the longstanding Roe v. Wade later this summer. Congressional correspondent Sarah Ferris, with Politico, obtained the memo, and tweeted an image of its recommendations.

The memo was distributed by caucus leaders Reps. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) and Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), but some Democrats appear to be less than enthusiastic about tweaking the party’s messaging in the midst of such a contentious fight, according to Politico’s reporting. Pro-abortion activists have called abortion a matter of “choice” for decades, contrasting themselves as “pro-choice” against the anti-abortion crowd’s “pro-life” messaging.

It wasn’t clear how the “Pro-Choice Caucus” plans to reconcile their avoidance of the word “choice” with their own name—perhaps they’ll change it to the “Pro-Decision Caucus.” Some Twitter users found humor in the irony of it all.

And some Democrats conceded the obvious—that Democratic wrangling over language means Trump is definitely going to have a second term.

The memo also included some other interesting”Abortion Messaging Do’s and Don’ts.” For instance, it determined that it was time to retire the venerable “reduce abortion/’safe, legal, and rare'” and use instead “safe, legal, and accessible.” After all, the notion that abortion should be infrequent is apparently intolerable to Democrats these days.

Meanwhile, “unwanted pregnancy” should be changed to “unexpected pregnancy.” “Conscience clause/protections” is now to be called “refusal of care/denial of care laws,” and “back-alley abortions/coat hangers” should be replaced with “criminalizing healthcare.”

It’s not the first time the pro-abortion crowd has found fault with using the word “choice” when it comes to abortion. Just last year, the Planned Parenthood Advocacy Fund of Massachusetts explained that it preferred using the term “pro-abortion” rather than “pro-choice” because to do otherwise is “hurtful to people who’ve had abortions” and “implies that abortion isn’t a good thing, that legal abortion is important but somehow bad, undesirable.”

“‘Choice’ assumes that everyone can get an abortion, and someone just has to choose whether or not they want one. Not everyone can get an abortion when they want one. Black feminists and feminists of color have pointed out that this isn’t the case: the legal right to choose to have an abortion does not always mean someone can actually get an abortion. ‘Choice’ ignores the lived realities of people.”

The new language guide comes a day after the failure of a Senate bill that was intended to legalize abortion up until the moment of birth, as well as prohibit restrictions of any kind nationwide.

DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW

Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Todd Jaquith

Comment

PLEASE JOIN OUR NEW COMMENT SYSTEM! We love hearing from our readers and invite you to join us for feedback and great conversation. If you've commented with us before, we'll need you to re-input your email address for this. The public will not see it and we do not share it.

Subscribe
Notify of
18 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Almost Sane
Famed Member
Almost Sane
12 days ago

They are right, it is not “pro Choice, it should be called “pro baby killing” All pro choice people need to be labeled “Baby killers” after Dementia Joe said aborting a “child”. If a child is aborted, as opposed to a fetus, that is killing a baby. and that point needs to be pounded into the democrats every day

REAL AMERICAN
Famed Member
REAL AMERICAN
12 days ago

It’s called word play and it’s old news. My ex used to lie and say she changed her mind. It’s manipulation and obviously not working.

Andylit
Noble Member
Andylit
12 days ago

You can’t make this stuff up. If you saw it in a movie or read it in a novel you would reject it as too stupid.

Dems do this all the time, sometimes like this, sometimes successful.

When is the last time you saw the MSM or even GOP officials use the term “Illegal Aliens”? The Dems have succeeded in removing that term from the national debate.

Do what I do. Every time you see the term “migrant”, “immigrant”, “refugee” or similar write a comment demanding that all of America return to using the correct legal term for these people.

Illegal Aliens.

Glenn R
Noble Member
Glenn R
12 days ago
Reply to  Andylit

You are exactly right when you say the dems have removed words from the debate and Conservatives have allowed it. Consider the frequently used term “Gun Violence”. That implies the gun is violent ignoring the fact guns are inanimate and it is people who are violent.

SecondOpinionz
Active Member
SecondOpinionz
12 days ago
Reply to  Glenn R

Debate 103- He who controls the definition of the words used will win the debate.

SecondOpinionz
Active Member
SecondOpinionz
12 days ago
Reply to  SecondOpinionz

“It depends on what the definition of ‘is’ is.”

  • Bill Clinton
biker dude 1000
Noble Member
biker dude 1000
12 days ago

dumbdonkeys

Almost Sane
Famed Member
Almost Sane
12 days ago

They are not donkeys, they are jackasses. The jackass is the symbol of the democrat party, as per Andrew Jackson. FJB

mitchell.george3@gmail.com
Trusted Member
12 days ago

Hell, “pro” says it well enough.

Paradoxo
Noble Member
Paradoxo
12 days ago

I’ll admit, it’s getting harder for me not to hate these people. All the more reason to keep telling myself I don’t, and that I don’t want to. My hunch is, somebody out there does want us to hate them as people. If the devil’s best trick is getting people to believe he doesn’t exist, his second is getting those who defend what’s good to do so for the wrong reasons, and his third is getting the wicked to promote evil for the “right reasons”. Those are the best ways to get “the good guys” to give up their souls and “the bad guys” to leave them to him. If “I hate them” becomes a reason for my actions, I’m going to lose no matter what, and perhaps especially in the event that I get what I’m looking for.

I expect others who share my religious convictions will agree that this new attempt to impose Newspeak on the world is a great way of pulling off the second and third tricks.
The last item on their list of new terms –“back-alley abortions/coat hangers” becoming “criminalizing healthcare”– is the only encouraging one, since it shows us those people are finally abandoning the older lies/ rhetorical canards. Small comfort, especially in light of the second-to-last item. Saying I can’t refuse to kill something because I think it’s a human being is a dangerous line to cross, and we’ll find, once again, that the slope was more slippery than party poopers like me keep saying it is, rather than less. My first reaction –since I have enough blood in me to sometimes react– was to retort that if they aren’t interested in protecting conscience, it’s because they have no conscience to protect. But I’m wrong, and I think God I am. It’s precisely because they do have a conscience that they have to invent new terms to lie about what we’re doing. And it’s why they have to avoid protecting it, too. They can’t afford to let anyone say what everyone already knows –that they’re in the moral wrong on this one– and so they have to put up a fence around their new counter morality. They’ll have to keep ratcheting it up, unless they accept they’re wrong and turn around.
Fortunately, fires burn themselves out. If we can’t get them to see they’re wrong rationally, then let them ratchet it up. When their hysteric prophecies fail to come true, we can hope the saner ones will start looking in the right places for good answers.

Glenn R
Noble Member
Glenn R
12 days ago
Reply to  Paradoxo

For my personal favorite I choose “Unexpected pregnancy”. How can pregnancy be unexpected, you do A and B may result. Guess that one of for dems who still think storks deliver babies….

SecondOpinionz
Active Member
SecondOpinionz
12 days ago
Reply to  Glenn R

This will be one of the rare occasions that I say-
‘We decide for you, for your own good (and taxpayer’s good)’.
Those boys, girls, and when young adults that have Single Mothers
(that are on Welfare) will usually practice irresponsible sex.
That usually results in Second Generation poverty families.
Also, the young men of a certain ethnic group do 60% of shootings.

SecondOpinionz
Active Member
SecondOpinionz
12 days ago
Reply to  SecondOpinionz

Decide to snip-snip these children while their mother is on welfare.

SecondOpinionz
Active Member
SecondOpinionz
12 days ago
Reply to  Paradoxo

Libbys Can Not Recognize Common Sense.
Since they blame others for their mistakes, they cannot learn.

You should not hate the individual,
but you do not let them have government power, also.

Kneil
Active Member
Kneil
12 days ago

They can change the name to whatever makes them feel good. Meanwhile I’ll keep on utilizing the English language as I see fit. Want to bet my descriptions are more accurate? On the plus side, My descriptions don’t have an expiration date

sixxfingers
Famed Member
sixxfingers
12 days ago

Changing “pro choice” to “pro decision” is the same as if GM changed “Chevrolet” to “Chevy.” Doesn’t change a thing!

Paradoxo
Noble Member
Paradoxo
12 days ago
Reply to  sixxfingers

I think it does. It takes more syllables to say “pro decision”, which forces them to pay that much more attention to what they’re saying while they’re saying it, especially now that they’re in the habit of saying “pro choice” instead. Very good, since I’m sure most of them won’t think about it very hard after they’ve finished talking, and every little bit helps. There’s a reason Newspeak in 1984 tended to use shortened words…

Almost Sane
Famed Member
Almost Sane
12 days ago
Reply to  sixxfingers

They need to be called pro baby killing, which is what they are. Dementia Joe used the term aborting a “child”. That means we have no more fetus removal, we have baby killing. Make the democrats eat that every day. FJB

Latest Articles