I said the other day I didn’t want to get into the pro-life vs pro-choice terminology argument. I still don’t, but suffice to say I think both terms are hopelessly prejudicial. And support somtimes comes from the most unexpected quarters. For example, you’ll never guess who said this . . .
I would like the pro-life people to get another name because, frankly, that describes everybody in this place
I do not know anybody who is against life. Equally, some people refer to those who would take the decision from the minister and put it where it belongs – where it is made on every other medical intervention – as being pro-abortion. Let me tell you that I do not know anybody who is pro-abortion. Nobody thinks it is a good idea. Nobody wants anybody to be in that position.
But the people who call themselves pro-choice – and that is the position I am in – want people to make that moral decision themselves. That is their decision. So I regard myself as pro-life. I equally regard myself as pro-choice … every woman that I have ever spoken to about that matter hopes that they, their daughters and their friends are never in this position.
They are not properly described as pro-abortion. That is designed to simply aggravate and is used as a pejorative to put people down. It follows that, if some people can claim to be pro-life and exclude others from it, the inference is that the others do not care about life. That is not true.
It was Immigration Minister Amanda Vanstone, as reported in the Herald. How annoyingly eloquent and straightforward of her to say something like that. How galling of politicians to make it difficult to demonise them based on their record or views on one issue when they say things that are sensible or even wise on other issues. It’s just not fair.