This is a book review and another look at what the term "pro-life" means, particularly in relation to the ideas of whole-life, pro-abundant life, consistent life ethic, etc.
Does the term pro-life *need* to be expanded to include other issues besides abortion?
IMO (I am not the author of the article), the term "pro-life" doesn't need to be expanded, but there IS room for discussion on why certain terms are used to denote certain ideas and movements and beliefs, and what their relationship is to each other, instead of arguing about
whether someone is really pro-life or not before you've even defined what you mean by that.
Personally, I see the term "pro-life" (PL) as a little umbrella, covering abortion and closely related issues like ESC research and IVF embryo disposal, as well as maybe euthanasia.
The term has historical roots in a very specific movement and very specific beliefs, and that is how I understand and use the term. I think terms like "consistent life ethic" (CLE) are bigger umbrellas, and cover more issues and beliefs.
The PL umbrella fits under the CLE umbrella, meaning all people who ascribe to a CLE would also logically be PL, but not every person who ascribes to the PL viewpoint necessarily holds to the CLE. And that's ok! The movement has room for, and needs, people from all backgrounds
and walks of life to fight for the killing preborn humans to stop, from that weird young bright-hair-colored SJW protesting the death penalty to that weird old religious aunt in the Bible belt knitting baby booties for the tiny local PHC and everyone in between and outside.
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.