From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Choice is the act of deciding what to do. It is also known as free will. Freedom is generally considered either the right or the ability to make decisions without coercion.

Choice is the basis of law. Choice is a fundamentally human activity, since law applying to animals does not apply to the choices made by animals. Instead, laws such as animal control and animal abuse laws apply to the choices of humans in regards to animals.

Liberalism and choice


Choice has been used by proponents of abortion (pro-choice), who claim that a pregnant woman has the right to abort an unborn child. Opponents of abortion claim point out that someone does not have the "choice" whether someone else, such as an unborn child, should live. In the words of a popular bumper sticker, "It's a child, not a choice."


In contrast, liberals argue that the decision to engage in homosexual activity is not at all a matter of choice, and that the lack of choice in this matter absolves them of all charges of sin.

Gender Identity

The liberal view on gender identity is similar to the liberal view of homosexuality, viewing it as not a choice. An example of this is a video making the ridiculous statement by YouTube user AMAZE Org. [1] Christian gaming Youtuber DeathLightning44 made two comments on this video comparing the statement that gender identity isn't something a person can choose or change with the statement that favorite color isn't something that a person can choose or change. He then proves that favorite color is changeable and uses modus tollens reasoning to imply that gender identity is both chooseable and changeable. He also posted a [2] reaction to the video in where he made a similar statement, but mentions religion instead of favorite color.


Liberals who swear up and down that "choice" must be respected (when it comes to deciding when and how to get pregnant or give birth) adamantly oppose free market principles. For example, there are restrictions on private transportation aimed at protecting government-run public transit systems:

  • ... many private transit options would become available (options now illegal in many areas) as a way of protecting the government transit monopoly [3]