Abortion supporters who don’t like the term “pro-life” won’t have to put up with it any more.
An anonymous abortion advocate created a new online browsing tool that changes the term “pro-life” to “anti-choice” in the raw text of websites so that abortion supporters won’t be confronted with language that they disagree with online. The “Choice Language” program is offered as a Google extension. These extensions allow users to add special features and functions to their browser.
Though the program author is anonymous, the program was supported by the National Institute for Reproductive Health Action Fund, according to Think Progress.
“We thought it was a really interesting and creative idea,” Andrea Miller, the president of NIRH, told ThinkProgress. “We agreed with her that the language in this discussion really matters.”
Miller called the term pro-life demonizing, and the product description added to her propagandizing condemnation of the term: “The term ‘pro-life’ is inaccurate in this argument – although it is a powerful tool in the fight against women’s health rights – as it serves to demonize individuals who are pro-choice by suggesting that in their support of a woman’s right to choose what is best for her own life, they also advocate for death in some way.”
“Using the language of pro-choice and anti-choice eliminates the sneaky and damning implications of a model built around ‘pro-life’ versus pro-choice language. Pro-choice advocates are not anti-life, anti-choice advocates seek to eliminate a woman’s right to choose.”
Of course, the creators fail to recognize that “pro-choice” is highly misleading because it doesn’t explain what that choice is: abortion, the death of an innocent human being.
CLICK LIKE IF YOU’RE PRO-LIFE!
The description also includes a screenshot of a LifeNews.com page showing a headline changed from “pro-life” to “anti-choice.”
Ironically, abortion activists touted the new program as providing “a more accurate framework” for the discussion about abortion.
Hot Air’s Jazz Shaw pointed out that the program is dangerously manipulative because it edits “the tone and inflection of anyone writing” about the abortion issue using terms that abortion activists don’t like.
“Can anyone explain how this is allowable?” Shaw asked after discovering the program. “Once the altered text shows up in one liberal blogger’s window it can be copied and pasted into other sites (within the limits of fair use laws) as if that was how the material was originally published.”
Abortion activists are right that language is important. But by creating a tool to eliminate words that their supporters don’t like, abortion activists are exacerbating the narrow-minded thinking that they claim to be trying to end.
