My topic that I chose to analyze discourse about is abortion.

Abortion is a hotly

debated topic of today with many different takes on the issue. But, many of the

headlines and news stories are full of language to make you think a certain way. For

example, the use of expressions like “pro-life” and “pro-choice”. Each is meant to sway

your opinion on the issue. So, I will be analyzing expressions like these as well as

proposed bills and articles in the media to show how language is used to sway opinion

or make you think a certain way.

The first thing I will be analyzing is a proposed bill in Florida for teenagers who do not

get permission from their parent or Guardian for having an abo rtion. The bill would

require teenagers to plead in front of a judge to be able to receive an abortion, if they

are deemed too “immature” to have an abortion they will not be allowed to. The word

“immature” that is used in the bill implies a lot about the teenagers who are pregnant.

The implication that a teenager is too immature to make the decision to get an

abortion then implies that they are mature enough to take on the huge responsibility

of being a mother and raising a child. The bill also states that the court must find

“clear and convincing evidence” that they are mature enough. When using language

like “clear and convincing” it becomes very easy for a judge to be able to reject a plea

for a stupid reason like “your argument was not convincing enough” because of their

own personal bias. The bill goes on to describe the different factors the court will use

to decide if a girl is mature enough to receive an abortion “age, overall intelligence,

emotional development and stability, credibility and demeanor as a witness, ability to

accept responsibility, ability to assess both the immediate and long range

consequences of the minor’s choices, and ability to understand and explain the

medical risks of terminating her pregnancy and to apply the understanding to her

decision.”. Much of the language used is very subjective such as overall intelligence.

How do you prove your overall intelligence to a court? The language used in the

phrase “ability to accept responsibility” is also very subjective. Is it more responsible

to terminate the pregnancy or to keep the child even if you are not ready to raise one?

The use of the phrase “emotional development and stability” also implies that if a

woman is not emotionally developed enough to be able to make the decision to get an

abortion is emotionally developed enough to raise a child.

The next thing I will be analyzing is use of different expressions like “pro -life” and

“pro-choice” and how they affect opinion and how abortion is perceived. People who

are pro-life believe that life begins at conception when the sperm cell enters the egg

cell and the phrase pro-life implies this belief that they are more concerned about the

child's life over the mother’s choice for an abortion. When people use the phrase pro-

life it also can imply that someone who is not pro-life do not believe that the unborn

child has a right to live and can call this murder. When people start using the word

murder to describe abortion it can become difficult to argue why abortions shoul d be

legal. Pro-life people also tend to use the term unborn child when referring to the
baby. Using the term unborn child also helps them use the word murder to describe

abortions because then they can call people who get or perform abortions child

murders. People who are pro-choice believe that the mother should decide for herself

if she should get an abortion and the phrase pro-choice implies that they are more

concerned about the mother’s choice over the fetus. People who are pro-choice use

the term fetus instead of unborn child when referring to the baby. Using the term

fetus describes it more scientifically as a group of cells that is not self-sustaining and

should not have rights. Because of the implications that phrases like pro-life and pro-

choice have Planned Parenthood instead decides to use the terms

pro-reproductive rights and anti-abortion. Using phrases like these better fits what

these groups believe. Pro-reproductive rights implies that they are for having the right

choice to do what they want with their bodies and reproduction. Anti-abortion implies

that they are just against abortion and does not imply that people who are not anti -

abortion are ok with “child murder”.

The next thing I will be analyzing is a news article from CNN. The news story is about a

Kentucky law that was rejected that would require doctors to describe ultrasound

images and play fetal heartbeat sounds to women seeking abortions. In CNN's

coverage of the news story they use many quotes that describe the law as

“unconstitutional”. By using the word unconstitutional they hoped to gain support for
their opinion that the law should not be passed. The reason that many people think

that the law is unconstitutional is it violates freedom of speech because the doctors

are required to say something that might be harmful to the patients. Steve Vladeck, a

CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law said

in the interview “Although this case is abortion-related, the plaintiffs' challenge was

that the law violated the free speech rights of the doctors, as opposed to the abortion

rights of the patients”. The use of a strong word like “violated” instead of another

word like “infringed” is meant to try to sway peoples’ opinion on the subject an d show

that the doctors rights would be taken away by a law like this.

Now I will be analyzing a news article from Fox News. The news story is about an

Oklahoma bill that would require doctors to inform patients that medication abortions

can be counteracted. The law would require that signs be posted inside clinics where

medication abortions are performed to inform women that after they take the first pill

for the abortion it can still be counteractive if they have second thoughts. In the article

they use quotes like “it hurts women in Oklahoma not having this disclosure” and “the

state remains committed to defending this law that requires doctors to inform women

that they can opt to reverse the process”. The language used in these quotes is to

portray that they only want to make sure that women are properly informed . The

language used also implies that this is the only way the process can be reversed. But

abortion rights advocates say that “requiring doctors to tell women their medication
abortion can be reversed to is forcing them to provide misleading information” . The

reason this information might be misleading to a woman is because as many as half of

women who only take the first pill during a medicinal abortion continue their

pregnancies even without the injection to stop it. Based on this it can be assumed that

law makers intentionally are trying to misinform women by not providing key details in

the information they are giving.

The last article I will analyze is another article from CNN. This article is about a bill In

Alabama that would ban all abortion regardless of reason other than putting the

mother in serious medical danger. In the article CNN uses language that shows support

for the law not being passed to show that it is a good thing to sway opinion. One quote

they use is “today's victory means people can still access the health care they need

across Alabama for now” trying to show the benefits of the law not passing. They also

say “The ACLU of Alabama and Planned Parenthood filed their lawsuit shortly after the

bill was signed on behalf of Alabama abortion providers challenging the law. The

groups cheered Tuesday's ruling.” again showing their support for the law not being

passed.

In conclusion there are many ways that both the media and lawmakers use language to

try to sway our opinion on different issues. From using misleading expressions like

“pro-choice” and “pro-life” which do not accurately represent the full complexity of
the issue. To using intentionally vague language that is open to interpretation to try to

make it harder for people who need abortions to get them. Using language like

Planned Parenthood does like “pro-reproductive rights ” and “anti-abortion” would be

very helpful to people to make better informed decisions and not have to rely on

rhetoric from each side to make their decision.