Frequently over the past 24 hours as the US presidential result cane in, I’ve heard people talk euphemistically about reproductive rights. Specifically,they have lamented the set back that this will be to women’s reproductive rights.
It leaves you wondering exactly what are the rights under threat? In some parts of the world, there are restrictions on reproduction. It’s meant the one child rule in China. It’s meant the evil of forced sterilisation in some places.
On the other hand there are some theological positions that disagree with any form of contraception.
In both those cases, you may consider there to be a denial of reproductive rights, either the right to reproduce or not reproduce.
The thing is that in the US election, neither of those things were under threat. No, the euphemism is of course about abortion. It’s about the so called right to take a human life, a fragile, vulnerable, defenseless little life.
And to be frank, it’s not about the right, as has been suggested, to do what you want with your own body but to allow people to be manipulated into passively accepting that others may take control over their body in order to destroy the body of another.
That the promoters of abortion (itself rather euphemistic) have to resort to such euphemisms is probably one of the biggest clues to how terrible it is, it is cruel to the unborn but it is cruel to young women too.
Faithroots 