From a style memo at National Public Radio:
“On the air, we should use ‘abortion rights supporter(s)/advocate(s)’ and ‘abortion rights opponent(s)’ or derivations thereof (for example: ‘advocates of abortion rights’). It is acceptable to use the phrase ‘anti-abortion’, but do not use the term ‘pro-abortion rights’.”
While I agree that the old “pro-life” and “pro-choice” were dreadful euphemisms, this strikes me as much, much worse.
First, you’re framing the debate on the basis that open access to elective abortion is a status quo setting for American society — this is a complex issue that has never been fully settled for all 50 states since the day Roe v. Wade was decided.
But worse is that it says those who oppose abortion are actually opposed to the legal abstraction of abortion “rights.” I suspect that most of the people they describe are vehemently opposed to the practice. This would be like calling abolitionists “slavery rights opponents.”
I understand the problem that the Kerry doctrine (personally opposed to abortion but protective of a woman’s right to have the procedure) poses in discussing this issue frankly in the time allowed by a radio broadcast, but anti-abortion and abortion opponent should suffice to talk about the effort to ban the practice.
As George Orwell told us:
“Political language — and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists — is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”
