Should we Reconsider how we sell the pro-Choice position?

[liberalpragmatist]

PLEASE READ THIS POST BEFORE REPLYING

Please don't flame me. I'm merely trying to start a discussion on this issue. I realize that there is a lot of passion on the site for this issue, but clearly we have to reach more socially conservative voters.

I wonder if constantly using the right to privacy as the main selling point of the pro-choice agenda is really effective. We have to understand that for a lot of people, they truly and sincerely have major moral issues over aborting a baby and we can't be intolerant of that.

That's why I propose we shift the focus to talking about how banning abortions are not effective public policy. Abortion rights drastically declined under Clinton and are now up under Bush. I believe we should start stressing prevention - acknowledging that abortion is a sensitive issue, but arguing that banning abortion will cause far more bad than good. Point out the coat-hanger argument. We can't have poor women dying because they can't get access to a legal abortion. If we want to reduce abortion rates, the answer isn't to ban the practice by appointing anti-choice judges, but by leaving the right to choose an abortion in place and working to reduce abortion rates through other avenues - increasing funding for family planning, etc.

Please don't flame me for suggesting these. I'm curious what people think of this. What are the potential downsides? Would this be effective at winning over those who are ambivalent over abortion - not anti-choice, but deeply uncomfortable with it nonetheless?

UPDATE: toiletbush makes a good point (great name!) - by constantly merely stressing "right to privacy, right to privacy!" do we run the risk of being overly legalistic? Maybe my approach has similar shortcomings? But I think the essence of the approach I'm suggesting would overcome this - we have to get people to really consider what life would be like if abortion were banned, making it clear that we don't LOVE abortion, we don't CELEBRATE it, we merely think it's often the least bad option for many women who are in an impossible position. Banning it would only make the problem worse and result in women dying out of desperation. We need to ask people, do you really want to see women prosecuted or go to jail because they had an abortion?

[ewagner]

1. The issue needs

to be REFRAMED in a clear, concise manner.

[splat]

4. This works for me

Find out what it was like before Roe v. Wade.
http://msmagazine.com/spring2002/brandesgratz.asp
Photo is gone from this link
Here's the photo (warning, graphic)
http://eileen.250x.com/Main/7_R_Eile/Santoro.htm

[Az_lefty]

2. It needs to be reframed as a Social rather then Legal issue.

[sandnsea]

3. Put it on the ballot

In every state where they put gay marriage on the ballot, we should have put a complete and total ban of abortion with criminal penalties on the ballot. We're going to have to force these issues and force the debate. And we MUST start talking in medical terms like intelligent people and STOP letting them brand issues with their made up catch phrases. The right to privacy and the right to make necessary medical choices is enough for the majority of Americans to keep abortion legal. You cannot possibly have doctors deciding whether a woman has really been raped or is making it up or asked for it or whatever crazy thing a nut like Coburn would say.

[leftyandproud]

5. we will have a repeat of the gay marriage ammendments...WHY??

Why would you do that...don't give them the option. They took the gay marriage ammendments by overwhelming 70-80% margins in every state..even BLUE STATES!

The abortion vote won't be as close, but you can be damn sure it will motivate the fundies 1000X more than they were motivated over gay marriage. It will go down in flames and abortion will be outlawed nationwide.

[sandnsea]

6. Totally wrong

A total and complete ban on ALL abortions would never ever ever pass, except maybe in Alabama or Mississippi. Having it on the ballot would force people to start truly thinking again. And if we had done it THIS year in swing states, it would have shocked alot of people into voting and thinking about the Supreme Court and taken some of those gay marriage votes away from Bush.

[demokatgurrl]

7. Well for starters, please STOP calling them pro-life.

Is George Bush pro-life? I don't think so. Is Rumsfeld pro-life?
They are ANTI-CHOICE. They want to take our rights away. They don't care about life once it's past the pre-natal stage.

[MaryH]

10. Evangelicals don't care about the health of the mother

they are just against any kind of abortion. Period. And the Catholic Church is even against birth control.

I think anti-abortion sentiment has been growing for the last years and now the Evangelicals have made it into one of their major belief points.

The Evangelicals are in control now - they own this government. We may have to truly go underground.

[ant]

8. abortion is complicated

First off, let me say I agree with you 100%. During the debates, when abortion came up, I really wanted Kerry to talk about how it's a symptom of larger social problems and you don't solve anything by just banning symptoms, etc.

However, I will also point out that people seem to be overestimating the pro-lifers in this country. People tend to have complex feelings about abortion. If pollsters ask "should abortion be legal in all cases?", a lot of people will say no. If pollsters ask, "should decisions about abortion be left between a woman, her doctor, and her god?", a lot of people will say yes. In other words, the privacy issue really does resonate with people. It's about families rather than government making personal, family decisions, etc. It's actually a very conservative position.

So, while I do agree with you, let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Abortion is a complex issue and we do need to recognize that.

At the same time, I'm a little confused by all these posts questioning the dem position on abortion. What got out the conservative vote was not so much abortion but gay rights.

[Czolgosz]

9. Here in Texas, abortion after the 16th week has been effectively banned

in violation of Roe v. Wade, and NO ONE BLINKED. Plus, women seeking abortions must wait 24 hours while contemplating a mandatory pre-abortion disinformation packet that has photographs of aborted fetuses and a false warning about the alleged (NOT TRUE) link between abortion and cancer. This nonsense passed by a great margin and it scarcely made any news in Texas. Ask 100 18-24 year old women from Texas about this law, and you'd be lucky to find 2 who know about it.

Do we need ballot initiates banning abortion to get these voters attention?

[Hamlette]

11. only 9% of americans want abortion banned in all cases

that means 91% of us agree with abortion (to differing degrees) yet the democrats have been branded baby killers.

how the hell did that happen? We DO need to reframe the issue.

[GumboYaYa]

12. God is the first pro-choicer.

God's gift to man is the ability to choose between good and evil.

Jesus said "judge not lest you be judged." Jesus is pro-choice too.

[FeelinGarfunkelly]

13. Completely agree

I talked about this in another thread

It's not about changing our position, it's about changing how we talk about it.