In order to persuade the personally opposed pro-choicer we must address this 1970s feminist fallacy that abortion is necessary for womens sexual equality and well-being. In point of fact, medical evidence, sociological data, and the lived experience of many women proves that abortion harms women physically, psychologically, relationally, and culturally.
The success or failure of political or social revolutions often depends on the terms used in the debate. But what if the existing lexicon and traditional understanding of words and phrases hurt the cause and bog down the movement? The answer is simple: If the people don't want to follow where you want to take them, make the destination appear more attractive. This is precisely what proponents of the "right to die" have done.
A friend of mine and I had an argument over Terri Schiavo as to whether food and water should be stopped to allow her to die. I said that to do so would really be like killing her. She said that she is going to die anyway. Is there any Church teaching on this matter?
Self-delusion is rampant in the euthanasia movement. Most proponents recognize that it is inherently dangerous to legalize killing. But they desperately want to believe that they can control the grim reaper. Thus, they continue to peddle the nonsense that "guidelines will protect against abuse" despite overwhelming empirical evidence to the contrary.
Previously, because euthanasia was prohibited in the Penal Code, the physician had to prove that he/she had fulfilled the requirements. Under the new arrangements, the Public Prosecutor has to prove that the physician has not fulfilled the requirements, in order to start prosecution. This is a significant shift.