Yoest: ‘Royal Baby’ Proves Pro-Choice Bias

Charmaine Yoest of Americans United for Life went on Mike Huckabee’s radio show and made the truly bizarre argument that the media proved its “pro-choice bias” by referring to the “royal baby” instead of the “royal fetus.” Okay, just listen and see what you can make of this.

[soundcloud url=”http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/104716908″ width=”100%” height=”166″ iframe=”true” /]

"I dunno. The latest Star Wars hits a bit too close to home."

Looks Like Flynn Has Flipped on ..."
"I'm sensing mixed messages here. :P"

Looks Like Flynn Has Flipped on ..."
"Why didn't campaign on this instead of his campaign of xenophobia and racism? Why did ..."

Trump Upset that He Can’t Control ..."
"Well, at least he didn't say they were pure like veal calves... yet...ToysRUs prolly removed ..."

Pastor: Moore Liked Young Girls Because ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • anubisprime

    see what you can make of this.

    Seriously deluded fucking batshit insanity in its purest distillation…That is truly a class apart, do you say this thing has the propensity to actually walk and fart at the same time…that is awesome in its spectacular disregard for the laws of physics!

  • sundoga

    I think she actually has a fair point. Language DOES influence how we think about subjects – “baby” has massive emotional connotations, while “fetus” is clinical and matter-of-fact. That said, as a strong pro-choice advocate, it’s not a bias I have any interest in changing.

  • anubisprime

    Yeah maybe but no one asks how the fetus blues are going!…this is not a matter of syntactic or linguistic analysis this is more a usage of language that is correct in context.

  • sundoga

    True enough. I would watch for the anti-choice side to start using this sort of linguistic alteration as a tool, though.

  • gshelley

    Surely it is the “pro lifers” who insist on calling the unborn babies, rather than fetuses. If the media had been calling it the royal fetus, I imagine she’d be complaining about the pro-choice bias in that case

  • http://aceofsevens.wordpress.com Ace of Sevens

    @5: That was my reaction. This bias goes the other direction.

  • alyosha

    This royal human, whatever you want to call it, was always going to be born, barring the kind of natural kind of abortion that occurs quite commonly.

    Context in this case is uncommonly irrelevant.

    If it were a COMMONER then perhaps it’s status would warrant further comment.

  • alyosha

    Only, perhaps.

    The royal family is an endangered species.

    We also await baby pandas and elephants.

  • jasonfailes

    Isn’t posting here a violation of your parole, Mabus?

  • skinnercitycyclist

    Simple, contextually based use of language found ironically profound by credulous mouth breather. It’s the same kind of “gee whiz” the banal-of-mind feel when Colonel Kurtz tells them the middle two letters of “life” spell “if.”

    You seem to have your stalker back, BTW.

  • exdrone

    I can’t believe it. She is a fetal elitist. Not once during her soundclip did she refer to the royal zygote. What, does it have to be multicellular before she can grant it the same dignity and attention? Bigot!

  • tbp1

    I remember reading a transcription of this a few days ago. I simply could not figure out what she was trying to say. No paraphrase I could come up with made any sense at all (forget agreeing or disagreeing—I couldn’t discern a coherent meaning).

  • http://drx.typepad.com Dr X

    She’s going for liberals don’t care about poor people, cousin of liberals are racists and conservatives are the champions of the black people.

  • http://itsmyworldcanthasnotyours.blogspot.com WMDKitty — Survivor

    Is there a transcript available?

  • Elizabeth Shaver

    what Albert explained I can’t believe that a stay at home mom able to make $6078 in a few weeks on the internet. did you look at this… max38.com

  • Elizabeth Shaver

    Aubrey. even though Marvin`s comment is amazing… last monday I bought a new Mazda MX-5 from bringing in $7326 this – four weeks past and-even more than, 10 grand this past month. without a doubt it is my favourite-job I have ever done. I started this 4 months ago and pretty much straight away started making a nice over $78 p/h. I work through this website, max38.com

  • mikeyb

    Only a conservative could come up with such a dumbass totally bizarre on the fly conspiracy theory like that. Let me guess, dumbass Huckabee went on to declare what a brilliant insight that was.

  • http://www.pandasthumb.org Area Man

    Oh come on. If the media had a pro-choice bias, they would be demanding the late-term partial birth abortion of the Royal Fetus, with a rusty pair of scissors, and to have its embryonic stem cells sold to liberal scientists and the occasional Asian restaurant.

    Anything less would be out of character for the pro-choice movement that they’ve been warning us about.

  • dingojack

    When the Asian restaurant isn’t, then what is it?

    :) Dingo

  • Paul Timothy

    for the lying “mental cases” @ FTB



  • unbound

    Batshit crazy person who doesn’t even understand that the bias of using the term baby (as others pointed out here) is actually the reverse (supports the anti-choice side).

    It isn’t the existence of batshit crazy people that bothers me; it’s that they get the microphone far more often than they should (i.e. that they get the microphone at all) and sometimes more often than the non-batshit crazy people.

  • Thumper; Atheist mate

    Aw, exdrone beat me to it @#11 :(

  • http://tadeina.wordpress.com tadeina

    I think she has a solid point; if your pro-choice position rests on the idea that a baby is very different from a fetus, it’s extremely telling that some bumps–the most privileged, wanted ones–get to be “babies” as soon as we’re aware of their existence. If I were pregnant, I would refer to the thing inside me as a “baby” far less often if I were considering abortion than if I knew I wanted it to be born.

    Happily, my pro-choice position doesn’t depend on that distinction. However, because I think that language matters, it wouldn’t hurt to bring “fetus” into more casual usage.

  • freehand

    “Baby” is shorthand in many cases for “the baby which the fetus will be”. Rather like my talking about my (not yet begun) retirement, or a young man thinking of his fiance as his wife.

    Whereas anti-choice activists typically say “baby” instead of “fetus” (or “zygote” or “blastomere”) in order to emotionally manipulate the dialog – since they have no moral reasoning(1) to support their position. This is as dishonest as saying “adult” when talking about a junior high school student. The child does not yet have the rights nor duties of an adult, and a fetus is not yet a baby. But talking about am expected and wanted baby is natural.

    (1) They are, rather, motivated to punish the sluts for having sex, which doesn’t sound as nice when you come right out and say it, so they cast about for the nearest substitute reasons they can come up with.

  • freehand

    David, go away. You are too unwell and too unpleasant to talk with the grownups.

  • http://sidhe3141.blogspot.com sidhe3141

    Hey Ed, I think we need a thread lock or at least some kind of spam filter over here.