Linguistics of Life

This morning, on the 35th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade (the landmark decision making abortion legal in the United State) I decided to compare Washington D.C´s two main newspapers. The Washington Times, the more conservative of the two, wrote a piece about the thousands upon thousands who will march in protest to the Capitol in the annual Pro-Life March. The Washington Post, the more liberal, wrote about the RU-482 has made abortions easier and more private.
While the coverage of this anniversary is what was to be expected, I find the usage of linguistics interesting. The Washington Times does not hesitate to use the words Pro-Life, or even Pro-Lifers, indicating an admittance of the fact that abortion ceases the life of an unborn child. Already, they have admitted their frame of reference by not calling the protesters anti-abortion.
The Post writes about ending a pregnancy, instead of ending a life. They quote someone saying that the R-482 has gone a long way in ¨normalizing abortion¨ which makes one assume that the writer believes that abortion can be considered normal. I am quite sure the thousands of people marching in Washington would not agree with that statement.
It is interesting though that the Washington Post is more forthright with their support of abortion, while the Times´ stance is clear only through their word choice. Obviously there are many people on both side of this debate. Perhaps the Pro-Life movement would be better served if conservative newspapers were brave enough to more openly voice their opinion.