Describe the nature of the rhetoric in the abortion debate.

What will be an ideal response?

Each side in the controversy tends to employ arguments and terminologies that are dear to the hearts of their supports but that tend to demonize and alienate the opposition. At times, the extremist rhetoric and graphic symbols used may alienate even some moderates, but ideological purity tends to be more important than coalition building in this policy area. The debate over abortion has no neutral ground. Even the naming of the opposing sides in this debate is calculated to create political advantage and to emphasize the values that the advocates are attempting to promote. On one side, the opponents of abortion use the term “pro-life” to describe their movement. It is difficult to be against life. Activists claim they are favoring life while their opponents are sending thousands of innocent children to their deaths. The rhetorical frame has created a powerful argument for the opponents of abortion. On the other side of the debate, the defenders of a woman’s right to a legal abortion define their position as “pro-choice.” Although this term does not carry the same emotional appeal of supporting life, in a democratic society, the notion that individuals should have the ability to make their own choices is a powerful political argument. Activists on this side of the debate do not advocate abortion as positive or desirable, but as an option that should be available if a woman deems it necessary. The principle at the center of this argument is that the choice should be made by the woman herself rather than by a doctor or by a public authority of any sort.