The reason I bring this up is that, about a squillion times a day, I get the urge to Inigo Montoya the pro-lifers on Twitter. This urge comes on strongest when the oh-so-insightful question “but what about the baby’s choice?” is posed by a pro-lifer who thinks he or she is being terribly clever.

I want to tell them this: “Choice. You keep saying that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” Inigo Montoya-ed!

Let’s assume for a moment that we live in a magical fairyland wherein blastulas, zygotes, embryos and fetuses all have the power of reason and speech. Let’s also assume that a particular magical, creepy talking fetus (no, Judy, not you) has a fatal disease which will condemn her to an extremely short life full of suffering. What if, in this alternate pro-life fantasy, that sentient fetus made the CHOICE to not be born? What if she decided she’d rather die now, pre-suffering, than after a few days, weeks or months of agony? Would the pro-lifers be so rabid in their defense of that baby’s choice? Given the pro-life stance on euthanasia, I’m going with “hell to the no.”

So even if a fetus were capable of making choices, pro-lifers would only allow he or she to choose to be born, making it not a choice at all. They’re all for choice as long as you can only choose the outcome they approve of. To call an action a “choice,” there must be at least two options involved. If you do something because you have no other option, that is not a choice. That is the opposite of choice.

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. Choice is no choice. Orwell would be proud.