Personal Choice

RECEIVED Mon., May 21, 2018

My Dear Editor,
    Usually Mary Tuma uses the term “anti-choice” to sanctimoniously denigrate her opponents. But in her most recent usage, she’s also simply wrong.
    In May 18’s News Headlines, she refers to gubernatorial hopeful Andrew White’s “personal anti-choice stance.” That phrase could only mean that Andrew White personally opposes a woman’s right to choose, which is not his actual position, and there is no evidence to the contrary. White’s actual position is, “It’s a personal choice that my wife and I wouldn’t make, but it is a choice that we wouldn’t take away from somebody else, either.” (Texas Tribune, May 11). That White and his wife wouldn’t choose abortion does not make them “anti-choice”! White could properly be described as “personally anti-abortion,” since he personally doesn't agree with abortion, but not “personally anti-choice,” since he personally does not oppose choice.
    And yes, I know that the blurb didn’t have a writer’s name attached, but it’s painfully obvious that it was Tuma, since among Chronicle writers she alone never misses any chance to use the “anti-choice” phrase. This includes her predecessors like Jordan Smith and Lauri Apple. Tuma’s zeal for the use of inflammatory rhetoric has now moved beyond being a distracting show of moral superiority and into the realm of careless misreporting.
Michael Bluejay
One click gets you all the newsletters listed below

Breaking news, arts coverage, and daily events

Can't keep up with happenings around town? We can help.

Austin's queerest news and events

Eric Goodman's Austin FC column, other soccer news

Information is power. Support the free press, so we can support Austin.   Support the Chronicle