Are we really divided on abortion?

[Nine]

I would say the vast majority of DUers consider ourselves pro-choice. Other than 500 threads about the word "rare," are there any important policy points on which we differ?

For example, is there anything in the Democratic platform that anyone here disagrees with?

Protecting A Woman's Right to Choose

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.

Abortion is an intensely personal decision between a woman, her family, her doctor, and her clergy; there is no place for politicians or government to get in the way.

We also recognize that health care and education help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions.

We strongly and unequivocally support a woman's decision to have a child by providing affordable health care and ensuring the availability of and access to programs that help women during pregnancy and after the birth of a child, including caring adoption programs.

If not, than what the hell are we fighting about?

[JoePhilly]

1. It is in the nature of Democrats to fight endlessly with each other.

From what I can tell, we can't help it.

Its not just abortion. Its pretty much every topic.

[lumberjack_jeff]

2. Apparently being pro choice isn't enough.

Last edited Tue Nov 12, 2013, 08:16 PM - Edit history (1)

I wish there was a hide thread by keyword function so I could not be alerted to the topics about which I'm forbidden to comment.

apparently there is! ->my account->trash can->keyword

There are several protected groups on DU in which the issue could be discussed free from the interference of those lacking a uterus.

Setting aside whether or not abortion should be any of my business, getting democrats elected IS undeniably my business and I think the rhetoric suggested demanded here about the topic is ultimately counterproductive to election success and to choice itself.

"Supporting choice" is a slogan that wins elections. "Fuck rare" is not. And neither frame offers any practical difference to the acceptance or availability of abortion, except to the extent that the latter alienates swing voters.

[applegrove]

3. I think the GOP plans to run on abortion in 2014. They are right

now trying to foment conflict within democratic circles so that the Clinton's "safe, legal and rare" policy on abortion is destroyed. Because they want Democrats to say stuff like "abortion on demand". Which sounds like video on demand.... that it would be a drive through abortion clinic. This is all about putting new life into an old GOP wedge tactic. And democrats seem to be helping the GOP out.

[rrneck]

4. Because

ideology producers feed on the fighting. It keeps their Lear jets in the air.

[ananda]

5. Just cuz a person might want abortions to be rare..

.. doesn't mean they're not pro choice.

For me, it means wanting a world where every women can just as
easily make the decision to have a wanted child as not... can afford
any kind of treatment, b/c, or medical procedure, including pre-natal
care, birth, and after-care, or abortion services if she desires .. all
readily available and safe.

This means financial independence for every woman, all kinds of support,
especially parenting support if she chooses to become a parent.

I should add that these are ALL things that rich people.. including Reeps,
teapers, and pro-lifers.. all TAKE FOR GRANTED.

[boston bean]

6. Problem is ananda some people are using rare on DU

To cast and make moral judgments. They do not mean it all in the way you describe.

[Nine]

7. I think the third paragraph clarifies things...

We also recognize that health care and education help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions.

This is what I assume pro-choice left-wingers are getting at when they say "rare." It's possible not all of them mean it that way but I think it's best to assume they do unless they specifically say otherwise.

[boston bean]

8. I am telling you that is not what all mean when using the term "rare".

[Nine]

9. And I just said that is probably true.

But I've seen a lot of threads going in circles about this, with people who probably agree for the most part seeming to not realize that they are in agreement. That's why I think it's best to assume common ground unless otherwise specified.

[boston bean]

10. Posting has been pretty consistent as far as I have seen.

I see people who describe it like you do defending others who do use it to shame and make moral judgments. And there is some discussion there.

[PeaceNikki]

11. Here's my standard c&p reply

My intent was never to 'drive a wedge', 'be the word police', or 'be divisive'.

I wanted to discuss the harm, stigma and confusion that can be caused by the words we choose. ESPECIALLY with people who support choice and may not realize the potential harm or that the party has updated the language. The words in question of this thread are "safe, legal and rare" - specifically taking note of the word rare. In context of abortion (not unwanted pregnancies, abortion). The national party removed it because of the fact it's open to interpretation... and all of the reasons outlined in the OP.

*I* get that you and other liberals are very very likely to fully support choice. *I* get what you *MEAN* by rare. We *all* want to make unwanted pregnancies rare... but do you not see, even a little, how using the "rare" language can be harmful? There have been massive attacks in every state on abortion since 1989. And they are getting worse. And, as such, I feel it's incredibly important to discuss how our language forms our societal beliefs and vice versa. To quote LeftyMom from another thread...


LeftyMom
19. That's the political genius and moral cowardice of the phrase.
To pro-choice people it means "unplanned pregnancies shouldn't be common, for women's sake." To the mushy middle it means "abortions for deserving women but not for those trampy other women." To anti-choicers it means "let's whittle away at legalized abortion even if we can't get a ban past the Supremes yet."

It's a political Rorschach ink blot. It means what you want it to mean.

I have had at least 2 conversations here with people who literally said, "oh, hey. wow - I really hadn't thought about it like that, I will change my language". Others have been nasty, combative, dismissive and rude. And there's been a lot in between.

Bottom line - it's a discussion. This is a discussion board. It's an important topic to me and I thought to many other DUers. Again- the word that causes confusion, anger, harm, etc was REMOVED from the party platform for these reasons. It's just weird that so many DUers are fighting it.


Here is this is the Democratic Party altered platform (with "safe, legal, rare" removed):

Protecting A Woman's Right to Choose. The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right. Abortion is an intensely personal decision between a woman, her family, her doctor, and her clergy; there is no place for politicians or government to get in the way. We also recognize that health care and education help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions. We strongly and unequivocally support a woman's decision to have a child by providing affordable health care and ensuring the availability of and access to programs that help women during pregnancy and after the birth of a child, including caring adoption programs.


See? It's possible to support all of the things we discussed and leave the frequency out of the policy discussion to avoid the confusion and/or potential harm.

Ideally, abortion rates drop as a byproduct of the rest but we keep the focus on what it should be. We typically don't fight to expand access to something we want to be rare.

The discussion of this is not new. It's just new to DU. It's not that controversial.

[hfojvt]

12. some seem to have strong disagreement with that platform

"Abortion is an intensely personal decision between a woman, her family, her doctor, and her clergy;"

Some have written that it is the woman's choice ALONE. The platform seems to allow other people some input.

others might disagree with this "a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay."

Which would support taxpayer-funded abortions.

Not sure all Democrats are in favor of that.

[el_bryanto]

13. I don't think we are divided on practice but we are divided on rhetoric

I think if you put up a bill or a referendum in front of most of us, we'd vote the same way.

But we are divided in how we discuss this issue and how we frame it. While the vast majority of us agree that a woman should have the right to choose, we are divided on what that choice means.

I don't know if that division is a good thing or a bad thing; possibly it would be best if people who felt the way I do left, so that DU could be united on this issue. DU could speak with on voice at that point - framing the issue as it should be framed.

Alternatively by allowing disagreement on rhetoric and the meaning of abortion, perhaps arguments would be sharpened and honed.

I don't know - probably to close to it right now to make much of a judgement call.

Bryant