If both sides were honest, the positions would be framed as “for abortion” and “against abortion.” Interesting how neither side would go with this phrasing.

Both sides try to distance themselves from the actual thing. “Pro-choice” softens the whole issue by suggesting that a woman may choose not to have an abortion, therefore including all women, both for, against and uncertain. “Pro-life” sounds like they’ll find a good family for the unwanted child and make sure the child and family get to go to Disney World every year.

Which brings me completely off topic: Why is it so many celebrities are going to developing (and not so developing) countries to adopt kids when we’ve got plenty of adoptable kids here who would love to be a part of the celebrity’s family? The Malawi baby must be the newest Hollywood accessory, whereas poor Joe from impoverished Williamsburg County, S.C. has nothing exotic about him except his lack of everything.

I’m willing to accept “pro-choice” and “pro-life” as reasonable captures of what each side intends. But the whole “A woman’s right to choose” needs to be countered with “choose what, exactly?”