Shrunk wrote:

The_Metatron wrote:How does the risk of the various abortion procedures compare with the risk of childbirth to the mother? That would be about the only reason I may advise against abortion, if it has more risk. If.

The comparative safety of legal induced abortion and childbirth in the United States.
Raymond EG, Grimes DA.
Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Feb;119(2 Pt 1):215-9.

OBJECTIVE:
To assess the safety of abortion compared with childbirth.

METHODS:
We estimated mortality rates associated with live births and legal induced abortions in the United States in 1998-2005. We used data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Pregnancy Mortality Surveillance System, birth certificates, and Guttmacher Institute surveys. In addition, we searched for population-based data comparing the morbidity of abortion and childbirth.

RESULTS:
The pregnancy-associated mortality rate among women who delivered live neonates was 8.8 deaths per 100,000 live births. The mortality rate related to induced abortion was 0.6 deaths per 100,000 abortions. In the one recent comparative study of pregnancy morbidity in the United States, pregnancy-related complications were more common with childbirth than with abortion.

CONCLUSION:
Legal induced abortion is markedly safer than childbirth. The risk of death associated with childbirth is approximately 14 times higher than that with abortion. Similarly, the overall morbidity associated with childbirth exceeds that with abortion.

Of course, that doesn't include all the women who get hit by cars five years after having an abortion.

Pregnant drivers face higher risks for serious motor vehicle crash

Standard road safety advice needs to be more top of mind in pregnancy, doctors say

Shrunk wrote:You would think, wouldn't you? I don't know if you've read the whole thread, but that "joke" I made about pro-lifers blaming deaths caused by car accidents on abortion? That was no joke.

Cito di Pense wrote:

purplerat wrote:

Shrunk wrote:

purplerat wrote:What's loaded about "pro-choice"? It simply means you favor allowing people to make their own choices about their body.

Because it sounds like it has nothing to do with abortion. If you knew nothing about the connotations of the term, when someone said they were "pro-choice" you would have no idea what they were talking about.

Well of course the term is relative to the topic, but I don't think that makes it loaded.

Perhaps you can give us your personal definition of 'loaded term', so that we know you understand it in the sense that nobody ever has to figure out what the load is. 'Pro-life' is no more loaded than 'anti-choice'. Euphemisms, you know.

What context can you remove from 'pro-legalisation'? The notion that it means being in favour of legalising something that's presently illegal?

Did you ever actually try to communicate using words? You know, those things made up of letters from the alphabet, and defined in dictionaries in various places?

1pro
noun \ˈprō\
plural pros
Definition of PRO
1
: an argument or evidence in affirmation <an appraisal of the pros and cons>
2
: the affirmative side or one holding it

1choice
noun \ˈchȯis\

: the act of choosing : the act of picking or deciding between two or more possibilities

: the opportunity or power to choose between two or more possibilities : the opportunity or power to make a decision

: a range of things that can be chosen

purplerat wrote:What's so difficult about that?

purplerat wrote:What's loaded about "pro-choice"? It simply means you favor allowing people to make their own choices about their body.

scott1328 wrote:

Shrunk wrote:You would think, wouldn't you? I don't know if you've read the whole thread, but that "joke" I made about pro-lifers blaming deaths caused by car accidents on abortion? That was no joke.

I think the actual statistic is 100% of the who have an abortion will die afterwards.

Cito di Pense wrote:

purplerat wrote:What's so difficult about that?

Here's how you started this:

purplerat wrote:What's loaded about "pro-choice"? It simply means you favor allowing people to make their own choices about their body.

Is that ALL it means? No? Then it's loaded, whatever hairs you want to split about whether or not it's explicitly 'incendiary'. It's not worth my while to play dictionary derby with you about shit that isn't in any dictionary, so if you have further argument about this, let's just take it as read that you win.

Shrunk wrote:

scott1328 wrote:

Shrunk wrote:You would think, wouldn't you? I don't know if you've read the whole thread, but that "joke" I made about pro-lifers blaming deaths caused by car accidents on abortion? That was no joke.

I think the actual statistic is 100% of the who have an abortion will die afterwards.

Shh. Don't give 'em ideas.

THWOTH wrote:

Agrippina wrote:I've been away for two weeks and I see there still isn't a really good reason for atheists to become pro-lifers. Or in other words, to interfere in the decisions other people make about their bodies.

Aye. No "The wishes of the many outweigh the rights of the one" argument so far.