The national debate over abortion came to OC last Friday. Jubal might have missed it in the "News Roundup". In any event, James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal caught the debate, and reported on it in his always insightful, and usually hilarious, "Best of the Web Today".
As background, the language used in this debate has long been key to proponents on both sides. In essence, the battle over the words used in the battle, shapes the outcome of the battle! Unlike the Federalists v. the Anti-Federalists of yore, the modern debate pits two "Pro's" against each other. "Pro-life" (everyone likes life, right?) versus "Pro-Choice" (who doesn't want choices?) It's a pro/pro situation.
You've probably noticed that the linguistic skirmish extends to the name of the what-ever-the-thing-is-in-her-uterus. Specifically, "baby" or "fetus." Generally, except in a scientific discussion, you won't hear a pro-lifer referring to "having a fetus." They have babies. Actually, most normal folks don't use this "fetus" terminology--regardless of what side they are on--unless they're debating at that very moment. (Imagine, for example: "Mom, guess what? You're gonna be a grandma!!!!! That's right, I've got a fetus!!!")
During debates on abortion, however, all bets are off--pro-lifers call it a "baby" and pro-choicers call it a "fetus". It is simply one of the customs universally followed by combatants in this arena. I believe the tradition began in an attempt to reduce the emotional sting of the sound of the pro-choice argument taken to its conclusion harming "a baby" rather than "a fetus." After all, a baby is a cute, cuddly, little person--everyone loves babies. A fetus, however, is simply "the unborn young of a viviparious vertebrate." Who really cares about unborn viviparious vertebrates anyhow? (In fact, polls show that a majority of OCers doubt the cops would let anything that's viviparious behind the Orange Curtain after dark.) Regardless of the reason for this terminology custom, you've probably heard it at some point in the public square.
Speaking of which, a real donnybrook broke out at the OCRegister last Friday. I'm not sure who won, but I wish I could have been a fly on the wall of Scott Martindale's cubicle, when he went at it with fellow OCR reporter....Scott Martindale. Here's what I mean. In a story about an Orange County woman who unexpectedly delivered her batus/feby:
April Branum went to her local emergency room Monday night complaining of stomach pain and emerged with the biggest shock of her life. She was pregnant with a full-term fetus.
Doctors, who discovered the baby when they took X-rays of her abdominal area, immediately sent Branum to UCI Medical Center in Orange for prenatal testing.
The fetus's lungs were fully developed, the heartbeat was strong, and no defects were detected. The baby was ready to be delivered.
Taranto comments on Ms. Branum's shock: "This is really confusing. Apparently she was surprised because what she thought was just a fetus turned out to be a baby. Is that right?" This confusion is understandable, given the writing: she had a full-term fetus, but the docs discovered a baby. The fetus's lungs were developed, so a baby was ready to be delivered. Does any of this make sense?
I get that this is a weighty topic, and much of my post is designed to be light. I'm not attempting to get at the underlying issues here. I just think we ought to be able to read a simple story--it's actually fascinating on another level: she didn't know she was pregnant!--without getting pulled into a PC debate in the mind of an author.
I'll conclude by paraphrasing a slogan from this debate: "Get the US out of my [Local Section]"
P.S. I apologize that neither the mom, baby, nor fetus are related--to my knowledge--to either Janet or Trung Nguyen (although they do live in the district.) If you've read all the way to this point trying to find the connection to the Sup race deeper than that, you've wasted your time... Now back to our regularly scheduled Nguyen-Nguyen blogging!