[Previous entry: "More on pro-abortion Catholic politicians"] [Next entry: "Kinda defines solipsism, doesn't it?"]
04/23/2004: "Cover up for killing"
The Sacramento Bee has a story about the use of language in abortion litigation that contains some truly Orwellian examples. To wit:
Much of the abortion debate involves "the politics of euphemisms," said Alison Renteln, a University of Southern California political science professor.
"It all depends on how you conceptualize the life that is at stake," said Renteln, whose book "The Cultural Defense" analyzes how courts deal with defendants' cultural backgrounds. "That the government and their witnesses use the word 'abortion' openly in court and the other side is sometimes reluctant to do so says a lot."
In the courtroom, Justice Department lawyers and government witnesses freely talk about "abortion" and "aborting"; the abortion-rights side generally speaks of "the procedure" or "evacuating a pregnancy."
The government's side speaks of "the baby." The other side sometimes uses the term "fetus," but often refers to it as "the pregnancy."
During the banned procedure, the anti-abortion side says, the baby is "partially delivered"; the other side says the fetus undergoes "intact dilation and extraction."
On the stand in San Francisco, Dr. Maureen Paul, the chief medical officer of Northern California's Planned Parenthood chapter, described how in a conventional abortion not barred by the new law, doctors "disarticulate" the fetus. The other side often uses the term "dismember."
"Disarticulate." That may be the most deliberately dishonest, morally grotesque misuse of language I've ever heard.
(Thanks to Mark Shea for the link.)
