Enough with "counter protests", why don't they call it what it is?

[nonconformist]

A Pro-War rally. An Anti-Peace protest.

They never organize unless it's to "counter" something we do (and I use the term "organize" very loosely here, heh). And what of ours do they counter?

Our Anti-War protests. Our Pro-Peace rallies.

They're "countering" those ideas, so that means they oppose them. So call it what it is - Pro-War, Anti-Peace.

This reminds me of the Pro-Choice/Pro-Life bullshit. They're Anti-Choice. Everyone should be inherently Pro-Life... they're just against a woman's right to choose. Besides, supporting war kind of knocks the wind out of those "Pro-Life" sails anyway, doesn't it?

They always frame and define themselves in completely misleading, "kinder and gentler" ways. I've even heard them use the term "Pro-Troops rally". Don't EVEN get me started on that shit.

[expatriot]

1. I just call it "Sad."

on edit: no, I guess I call it fucking hilarious. Perhaps if there were more than like 100 of them there it would be sad.

[nonconformist]

2. "Pathetic" has a nice ring to it.

Covers both the "sad" and "fucking hilarious" angle.

[NYC]

3. I call them pro-war.

I agree that we all should.

[dorktv]

4. I know someone who argued with me on calling Anti-choicers

anti-choicers. He said that it offends Dems who are pro-life and we cannot afford to lose them.

Sigh.

[O.M.B.inOhio]

5. Agreed, except...

I'm pro-choice, but I don't think it's fair to characterize every "Pro-Life" person as "Anti-Choice." Some do believe that a fetus is a life and a voiceless person deserves protection. Some individuals have that belief and are principled. I was in line at a Kerry rally (for hours!) with a woman who "didn't like to see babies killed." But she was different from the "Pro-Life" wackos who were shouting at the Kerry supporters, holding up grotesque posters. One was lauding the murders of abortionists! Now, the "Pro-Life" movement, the political organizations, the lobbying forces - something else motivates them besides the defense of the defenseless. The freaks who risk traumatizing my living, healthy children with roadside placards with grizzly photos are not motivated by love of humankind. Those who want a living, breathing woman to die so her fetus can be born, orphaned; those who want a terrified 16 year-old to have her prospects for a fulfilled life limited by a baby she is unprepared to care for; those who criminalize abortion but personally despise the poor; those who weep for an embryo but defend an invasion that has killed a hundred thousand people, including fetuses - these are hypocrites. They're Anti-Choice. They're Pro-Fetus but Anti-Life.
Pro-Hypocrisy and ANti-intellectual. Pro-Selfrighteousness-Judgmental-Sonofabitch, Anti-Compassion and Anti-Christian. Pro-Theocracy, Anti-Democracy.
May they be reincarnated as unloved deformed orphaned crack babies... and soon!

[nonconformist]

6. Actually, in my opinion,

I think they should still be characterized as "Anti-Choice". Purer motives, while noble, don't really change what it IS. My argument is that everyone, short of a sociopath, is inherently pro-life. It's a given; an obvious label we all, as human beings, should carry. A cop-out, if you will, of what they're really stating - that they're against a woman's right to choose abortion. I don't say that they should be called anti-choice to "insult" them, so it should only be used for those who are hypocritical about their stance, but to apply a more accurate label to all since this is issue-specific.

For example, I'm not "pro-abortion", I'm pro-choice. I believe every woman has a right to chose what is right for her and it's really none of my business, since I will not be raising nor supporting her child. I wouldn't personally chose to have an abortion. It's simply about choice. I do understand that some people are sincerely against all killing, including war, and feel that abortion is a form of killing. My mom IS Catholic, after all (a wonderfully smart and liberal one, I'm pleased to say). Still, I think that since this about a specific issue, the labels used should reflect that. The term pro-life has become synonymous with the anti-choice movement, and I feel that it's inaccurate for many reasons.

[SledDriver]

7. I agree

Call them what they are:
Pro-War, Anti-Peace

If they call themselves Pro-Bush, then by extension they must also be Pro-Cheney, Pro-Rumsfeld, Pro-torture, Pro-Halliburton, Pro-Big Oil, Pro-lying, Pro-cronyism, anti-environment, anti-black, anti-gay, anti-poor, Pro-Saudi, etc...
If they object, remind them that they just said they were Pro-Bush, Mr. "you're either with us or against us". Bush doesn't see shades of gray, everything is black or white (literally and figuratively). So if they claim to support Bush, they must then also accept, support, and defend his positions, decisions, appointments, lies, failures, and crimes. You're either with him or against him.

As for Pro-choice/Pro-Life -- You can't claim to be Pro-life if you are pro-war. Unless they've changed the definition of "life", if you claim a philosophy of "pro-life", you cannot then support anything that would bring about an end to life. You cannot claim to be "pro-life" if you support people who bomb abortion clinics. You cannot claim to be "pro-life" if you support people who shoot doctors that perform abortions. You cannot claim to be "pro-life" if you support a spoiled, rich, frat-boy, cokehead, achoholic imbecile who sends the sons and daughters of other people off to fight an elective war based on lies where the only clear goal is misguided "patriotism".

pro-choice/anti-choice or pro-abortion/anti-abortion