Quit playing word games

Presentation is everything, especially when it comes to swaying public opinion. The irony is how quickly the descriptive words change to engender sympathy on television dramas.
On a recent “Harry’s Law” the lawyers argued that the beautiful, college-bound woman should not be punished for providing another student with access to a “just in case” birth control pill. The argument emphasized, “It does not cause an abortion, just an increase in hormones for women of child-bearing age.”
The lawyer pressed that “women of child-bearing age” (which includes those 12 or 13) should have access to the pill. Of course, she went further than the case and argued that the whole pharmaceutical drug licensing structure was wrong for limiting access to a pill that should be available over the countertop. The script writer had a point to make after all.
But take that phrase “all women of child-bearing age” … it implies that because these individuals are physically mature enough to have children, they are therefore women and should be able to make these decisions and have access to the medication.
But take those same women of child-bearing age, let them be on the lower end of the age spectrum, let them have sex, become pregnant and let them practice that other long advocated right to choose to bear the child, and they are referred to as children bearing children.
Given the second circumstances on the same show and the same actor-lawyer would be scripted to pull the heart strings for the unfortunate circumstances surrounding said child.
Terminology matters.
A biography written of life decades ago described a scene at a parsonage with a young couple asking to be married that afternoon. The pastor, who did not know them, questioned their age. He turned to his wife. She studied the woman and said, “she’s old enough.” He performed the ceremony only to be told later that the bride was not legally old enough to marry. Her family had plenty to say at first, but became very quiet as it became obvious she was a woman of child- bearing age. The young parents accepted responsibility for their actions and acted as a man and woman.
In 2002, Laci Peterson’s disappearance held the headlines for weeks and months partly because she was within six or seven weeks of delivery. Throughout the coverage the unborn child was referred to as her baby. Laci’s husband, Scott Peterson, was ultimately arrested, tried and convicted for killing both his wife and son. The unborn son was always referred to as a baby. Not a fetus, a baby.
Yet at the same time headlines and editorials pro and con on everything from early abortions to late term partial birth abortions repeatedly refer to other unborn sons and daughters as fetuses. “Fetus” is a legitimate scientific term, but when used in news stories and tv dramas it means, “hey, this isn’t a person, it’s a problem.”
The wording changes to accommodate the argument.
Thus the irony that because of Laci Peterson and her son, the United States Congress passed “The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212)” which recognizes a “child in utero” as a legal victim, if he or she is injured or killed during the commission of any of more than 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines “child in utero” as “a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb,” as explained on Wikipedia.
Note, “any stage of development.”
When the terminology is “fetus” the unborn are reduced to an object to be removed; its life terminated and the terminator is given a check for services rendered.
But if that same fetus has his or her life terminated during a crime, he or she is a person and the terminator is liable to prosecution and imprisonment – without consideration of their stage of development.
We live in a time when society screams for the right of women to choose and plays on our sympathy for the burden of women so inconvenienced. Then we turn around and pluck those same heart strings in the case of crime and play on public sympathy for the precious unborn baby whom the mother never had a chance to meet.
A long time ago a great teacher said, “Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one,” Matthew 5:37 (NIV).
Something to remember: don’t measure your words depending on the circumstances. Either an unborn child is precious and worthy of protection or he isn’t. Either a 13- to 15-year-old is a woman and old enough to choose to have sexual encounters and deal with the potential ultimate results, including bearing and rearing that child, or she isn’t. Let’s quit playing games.