Guest Author - Elizabeth Ross

It has happened to just about everyone who is pro-choice, especially if one makes her personal beliefs clear publicly. Someone says something about abortion being wrong, or in more uncommon circumstances, says that birth control of any kind is sinful. The next part of the conversation is a make or break for not only a friendly relationship, but also the pro-choice movement.

One thing I have learned in over 20 years of being involved in political campaigns is the importance of semantics in situations like this. There was a time when I used to agree with candidates who would follow the standard “I’m a pro-choice politician, but I’m pro-life as a person.” I understand that the fence pole is much safer for someone who is seeking to win the hearts and minds of the majority, but in the end, it is short-changing the pro-choice movement and women.

Now, my advice to candidates (and the general public) would be to stay with the first part of that comment – either one is pro-choice, or she is not. In following my own advice, I have stopped commenting altogether on any personal issues I have with any part of the pro-choice movement, at least in mixed company. Those issues are brought up only with the leaders of the movement, through feedback to organizations like Planned Parenthood of America, and NARAL Pro-Choice.

This is the logical next step, in my mind. The pro-choice movement is faced with combating a far more organized movement that also tends to end up with far more money to play with. Even if the pro-choice movement would become more organized, and have more money, it is unlikely that it would be able to be absolutely successful against the anti-choice foes. The basic reason for this is in fighting. There are too many people in the pro-choice camp who do not now, and might never, follow the advice mentioned above.

So, no matter how many anti-choice activists decide to bomb clinics, shoot doctors, and threaten women, the pro-choice side will still have trouble making it clear that it does hold higher ground. Public disagreements in the ranks are the roots of many of the problems in the movement. That is not to say that if someone is pro-choice, they should stop talking about anything they see wrong within the movement. There is a time and place for everything, and those disagreements need to be voiced where they will actually do some good. Speak the pro-choice movement plank in public – reserve your personal thoughts for just the leadership or other pro-choice people. Above all, leave the evangelizing to the opposition. If you have to beat someone into submission to support your position, you didn’t gain a supporter.