A Message To Fellow Liberals About Abortion (long)

[Merlin]

Let me be blunt. Abortion is killing the entire progressive agenda. It’s dragging us down like a lead anchor. It is time we consider alternatives to opposing the reversal of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. The Democratic Party does not exist to defend abortion. It exists to govern the nation.

In November, a majority of white women voted to elect one of the worst Presidents in our history to a second term. It is a startling fact revealing that enlightened women have evidently not been successful in educating other women about the importance of abortion "rights." It appears they have left that burden to be borne by Democratic politicians. But a politician can never lead public opinion. She/he must either follow it or lose, absent extraordinary charisma or special circumstances.

With a Bush second term a reversal of Roe v. Wade may be inevitable. But all is not lost. Having Roe overturned may wake up a lot of sleeping sisters. Or maybe not. When white women vote for a born again right wing ideologue, we must pay attention to what they are implicitly saying. They obviously feel Roe is not that important to them. Who are we to claim otherwise?

If and when Roe goes down, abortion will still be legal in all the blue states and even a few red states. So it will not be nearly the situation we had before Roe with back-alley abortionists--at least not in the populous and more enlightened areas of the country.

The big question now may well be: Will the Republicans really deliver the defeat of Roe in order to feed that evangelical tiger they are riding into the void? Or will they instead do everything in their power to keep Roe in place, knowing that abortion is the greatest thing that's happened to the Republican party since slavery?

For Republicans, the abortion issue is the gift that keeps on giving. Why would they want to give it up by overturning Roe? It's entirely possible we will see one excuse after another for why they can't dump Roe. Arlen Specter may simply be doing his party's bidding by appearing to block its escape from its Roe briar patch.

The abortion issue has allowed the right to claim God and Jesus for its own, to demonize liberalism, energize fundamentalists and cement an unprecedented alliance between mainstream Catholics and Protestants -- all of them lined up solidly against us and everything that we stand for.

Without abortion, they would be unable to form such important alliances or whip up anything like the fervor they now enjoy. Oh sure, they'd still have gay marriage to rail against. But that's a much more manageable issue. Gays don't need gay marriage. What they need is civil unions. Civil unions we can successfully defend, and that defuses the issue on both sides.

Thinking, sincere religious people share the vast majority of their values with liberals. Jesus, after all, was the first and is still the most prominent liberal. His teachings of tolerance, peace, and helping the poor, the sick and the elderly fly in the face of the Bush agenda. The abortion issue’s potency, more than anything else, has driven these thoughtful, well meaning, decent people into the right wing’s web.

We must keep in mind that Republicans can not win on their primary agenda alone. They don’t even campaign on their chief objective, which is to further enrich the powerful, further suppress the middle class, and further tighten the noose of corporate-oriented media dominance around the neck of American democracy. Their real goals would never gain the support of the people. So instead they scratch open and hype up divisions within our society to shift the political focus onto feigned morality and away from effective, good governance. This is the only viable strategy they have to claw their way into power. Fortunately for them, they have the money to pay an army of think tank gurus and talking head blowhards to demonize Democrats and galvanize the gullible.

Many with deep-seated moral values who despise the practice of abortion have no idea whatsoever that they are being manipulated by Republican strategists into voting against their own best interests. They are true believers when it comes to their religion and their politics. They don’t understand their role as pawns. What keeps them glued to the right wing is wholehearted opposition to the mass murder of what they believe are tiny human beings.

Without the abortion issue to ride, Republicans would no longer own the faithful. Democrats would be free to earn back the support of Catholics and farm belt states, which always voted Democratic before Roe. Our party could work to re-claim a clear majority of the US electorate. Their party would be in shambles.

In many ways, abortion is similar to the slavery issue. Then, too, the Democratic party was slow to grasp the power of a determined religious movement. Then they were called abolitionists. Today, even liberals see most of them as heroic and correct. As a result of its failure to respond to the moral movement against slavery, the Democratic party lost control of US politics for 50 years at the federal level, from 1860 to 1912, except for 2 terms. Are we in the midst of a similar--or worse--run now?

We have today what is undeniably a zealous Christian movement against abortion. Some of us ridicule and deride and condemn true believers. But that is an arrogant and foolish view. These folks are not idiots. Go into any church in the country on a Sunday morning and take a good look at them; listen to their voices. Hear their songs and prayers. Observe their expressions. These people are like us. They believe deeply in their cause. They are middle and lower class Americans. Many are articulate. All are fervent. And they are, by and large, truly convinced that abortion is morally indefensible.

Whether abortion is morally defensible or not depends upon one’s interpretation of the scientifically obscure point at which “human life begins.” I don’t personally agree with those who say it begins at conception. But I accept the legitimacy of the argument, that—in the absence of scientific certainty—we ought to err on the side of moral caution.

I do think that abortion is politically indefensible. The only defense we are able to offer is that a woman should have control over her own body. But that argument sounds as hollow to abortion opponents as the claims of slave-owners that they should have control over their own property. In both cases the issue is whether a specific type of living being should be considered human life or not.

If a fetus is seen to be human life, then “a woman’s right to choose” is a lame justification for its willful destruction. The American people are constantly shown pictures of fetuses with identifiable human form, and led to believe such tiny humans are representative of those being aborted regularly and by the millions. Billboards and TV commercials and newspaper ads and direct mailings and books and magazines and windshield flyers and super market handouts all flash these pictures around constantly throughout middle America. There is an army of anti-abortionist activists out there. But we have simply ignored them. The result is that we have lost this issue in the court of public opinion.

With abortion to defend, we cannot win. Without it, we cannot lose. Without it we are free to reclaim the allegiance of those whose religious beliefs and moral values naturally incline them toward the principles and agenda of the Democratic party. Without abortion, the right wing doesn't have a prayer. Pun intended.

So either we have to make some accommodation to reality, or we will continue to get our butts kicked. We can either see our agenda empowered, or we can, like stubborn donkeys, insist we will never compromise any of our positions, and stand on the sidelines while the right wing dismantles every damn thing that enlightened human beings have ever achieved in this country.

Well, if you're offended, I'm sorry. But somebody needed to say it.

Now, excuse me while I duck out of the way. I expect the ripe vegetables to start flying any second now.

[murielm99]

1. Abortion was only one of the wedge issues they used this

election.

I think they used gays much more. Remember how many anti-gay amendments there were on state ballots?

Get rid of abortion, trample on women's rights, and they will just find a new group to demonize.

I don't feel like sacrificing the rights of young women to win elections. I might as well be a republican, then.

[Merlin]

4. These points were addressed in the article.

Your arguments are the same old same old. They don't hold water.

Why? Because abortion is the single most potent issue in their arsenal and has drawn millions of people who used to be with us to their side. The other issues are manageable. This one is not.

As far as "I don't feel like sacrificing the rights of young women to win elections" well that's more of the same old logic. Then you say "I might as well be a republican, then." Are you saying the only thing that separates us from the Republicans is abortion? I don't believe that for a minute.

And right now, all those other things that separate us from Republicans are being sacrificed on the altar of this one issue.

[murielm99]

I never said that abortion was the only thing separating us

from repukes.

Don't put words in my mouth.

If we sacrifice women's rights, then the next time, we will have to sacrifice something else. And, the religious right is not just after abortion. They want to do away with birth control as well.

How about we sacrifice some of your precious male rights? Who the fuck are you to tell women they have to give up their reproductive choices in order for us to win elections?

Most people in this country do support the right to an abortion.

[Merlin]

27. Yes you did, by impllication.

You said "I don't feel like sacrificing the rights of young women to win elections. I might as well be a republican, then."

Now you say you really meant that this was the first step to further "sacrifices." That's the slippery slope argument and it is of course utter nonsense.

Abortion is the only issue they have with the kind of power needed to draw people who support all of the rest of the Democratic agenda away from us and cause them to vote Republican. I know dozens.

And don't give me this shit about "who the hell are you" and "male rights." Please. I've had it with that kind of arrogance. That's just an insult. Let's stick to the issue shall we.

I'll be happy to sacrifice some "precious male rights." Like for example, holding men accountable financially--from day one--when they impregnate a woman, and jailing them if they do not live up to their responsibilities. Those kinds of laws are long overdue.

Without abortion we can win the rest of our agenda--including birth control and sex education and everything else we believe in because without abortion we will be in power again.

[murielm99]

216. Read my first post, fool.

I said they used the gay issue more than they used abortion. I said if we abandoned abortion rights, they would just find a new group to demonize. Give them one thing, and they want more. Soon we will no longer be Democrats.

I repeat, don't put words in my mouth.

Slippery slope, my ass. That is what they do.

And don't turn a responsibility into a right! Of course men should support the children they father! How typical of one who holds the power. You are the one who is arrogant. You do not get to decide whose rights are ignored.

You should apologize to everyone in this thread for your rudeness.

Oh, wait! Don't bother. I seldom use the ignore feature, but today is one of those times that I will take advantage of it.

[rabid_nerd]

29. Not on demand

not when given options like "on demand", "limited", "to save life" or "no access"

[212demop]

46. According to who?

How are the other issues manageable? How is this one not?

Seems to me that gay marriage was the big news out of this election.

And it's not just sacrificing women's right, but women's lives to win elections. Without choice ACTUAL WOMEN will die, many from the very back alley abortions you mention. Don't dismiss these arguments so lightly.

[Walt Starr]

95. Okay, fine, abandon choice as an issue

Do it, and I for one will NEVER vote for another Democrat again.

I bet there are millions more like me who will abandon the Democratic Party if it abandons a core value. Sorry, but this is a non-negotiable for me. I refuse to vote for any member of any party that is anti-choice.

[buddysmellgood]

2. Polls show the majority of Americans want to uphold the right.

Grow a spine.

[Merlin]

6. Not the one poll that counted.

And by the fucking way, I've got a lot more spine taking my position than you do following the crowd, thank you.

[atreides1]

24. You Do Have A Spine

But in a way you're following a crowd as well. We all do it, but can you look a woman in the eye and tell her that the Democratic party has to drop the abortion issue in order to get political support from a group of religious fanatics, who in theory don't even believe that women should be working outside of the house?

Do you really believe that giving in is going to help? The more you give to people like Falwell and Robertson, the more they're going to take.

They do not believe in compromise, you cannot talk to them, what else are you and others who think like you, willing to give up?

Abortion cannot be the only issue that you would retreat on? There must be others? Why don't you tell us the other issues that you would dump, in order to win.

As I stated you do have a spine, but you also are following a crowd.

[Merlin]

32. Well, thanks. I'll take that as a compliment.

You are viewing the opposition as a stereotype. Are there fanatics and demogogues on their side pushing this issue? Yes. Are there tons of fundies who will never vote for us on their side cheering on the demogogues? Yes.

But there are--as I tried to point out--millions of people who otherwise support the entire Democratic agenda who vote Republican strictly on the basis of this issue. I personally know dozens.

There is no need to retreat on other issues. This one has such power it rises above all others. Few issues have the moral potency of the life or death of a human being.

You may not agree with them that a fetus is a human being. But at some point it becomes one. And it's obviously at some point before birth. Exactly when, nobody knows. So how is it wrong for them to take the cautionary approach that life begins at conception and is worthy of protection?

[Paladin]

64. And There Are Millions Of People......

....many of them educated, professional women, who buy into the Republican agenda, but who keep voting Democratic on a regular basis. The reason? Reproductive choice. Waver on this issue and these people will follow their natural inclinations and join Republican Nation. That, or sit at home on election day. If people like you prevail, there won't even be a Democratic Party in a few years....

[Merlin]

73. Back atcha.

First of all, I've never seen any evidence whatsoever to support your convenient, ad-hoc argument that millions of women who would otherwise vote R now vote D strictly because of support for abortion "rights."

Second, in case you haven't noticed, we're dyin' here already. We are the incredible shrinking party. When I was a kid, we ruled. Today, we barely have a shred of legitimacy left.

Exactly how much more losing will it take to realize something's got to give?

How much more losing will it take to realize--in your words--"there won't even be a Democratic Party in a few years," except maybe for a bunch of us posting here on DU?

[Paladin]

110. If You Haven't Met.....

...some of the many Republican women who vote Democratic because they want the government to stay the hell out of their bodies, that just means you're not getting out enough. They've all over the place. And support of Roe v. Wade remains the majority sentiment in this country, the efforts of agenda-toting extremists like yourself notwithstanding.

And I've already had a belly-full of that "we're dyin' here already" sentiment from all the Second Amendment Absolutist "Democrats" down in the Gun Dungeon. Like you, they never have a single positive thing to say about the party. Like you, they're feverishly attempting to get the party to walk away from its principles. Like you, they're advocating a radical shift in ideology to the right. There are things that need to be done to get the Democratic Party back to strength, but becoming a bunch of fucking Republicans isn't on the table.

[muriel_volestrangler]

45. 'The one poll that counted'?

So, you've unilaterally decided to reduce the presidential election to a referendum on abortion. How much of the time was spent campaigning on abortion? Do you think either candidate saw it as the only issue that mattered? Were there endless adverts saying "overturn Roe V. Wade"?

What's the point of dropping a position that is popular among your own supporters, and much of the opposition?

[Merlin]

75. I'll say it again...

The point--to repeat a portion of it for your benefit--is that this issue is so potent that it has allowed the Catholic vote--just for one example, which used to be 2/3 Democratic, now go the other way. That's strictly a result of the abortion issue. Purely and simply. It's not just this election, it's the past 30 godam years!

Second, abortion is the one single issue that has enabled the right to turn the midwest bible belt against us. Back before Roe, the farm belt was Democratic. Now we are called "Babykillers" and demonized as people without any moral values.

You may ridicule them, but--I say again--if you believe--as these people legitimately have a right to believe (not that I personally agree with them) that a fetus is a human being, it is not hard to understand why this is such a potent issue.

[Scout]

87. their belief is not enough

their belief, legitimate or otherwise, that a fetus is a human being is not sufficient cause for the government to restrict a woman's right to bodily integrity and privacy.

[Iris]

135. Yes. Why don't we just ask them to PROVE life begins at conception.

n/t

[Scout]

154. that wouldn't be enough anyway...

a fetus is alive, it's just not a human being with rights.

[muriel_volestrangler]

182. I'm not ridiculing them, I'm ridiculing you

You are ignoring the polls that say a majority of people want RvW retained. Instead, you are claiming, with no support whatsoever, that abortion is the sole reason that Democrats have been unpopular. You're in your own world - a fantasy land. Either that or you were bored, and wanted to see how many people you could wind up.

[rbnyc]

217. You mean the one that was counted by Diebold? (nt)

[illflem]

9. It would be political suicide for either party

to support overturning RvW. A large majority of Americans want to keep pro choice intact. Only reason you hear so much about it is the anti-abortion folks have big mouths.

[blondeatlast]

12. Nailed the entire issue. Thank you.

We don't need to abandon it, we need to let the Radical Right fundamentalist faction hold the Repub's feet to the fire.

No way will the Repub moderates let them overturn RvW; it'll expose their real agenda and be the death of the party besides.

[DavidMS]

15. It seems that many americans like the packing, not the product

I think its how people react to the "culture of life" retotric as opposed to the grim reality of girls and women carying unawanted and dangerous pregnancies to term.

Its simply a matter of re-defining the terms of the debate...

[rabid_nerd]

28. Yes,

but it was not specified whether "on demand", or "limited access" or "no access", which would be a more valid poll.

Greater than 40% of Democrats fall short of the "on demand" litmus test of the Pro-Choice movement.

There is a great discrimination - despite some Pro-Life Democrats who are some of the strongest candidates today on labor, health care and the economy (Bob Casey Jr. comes to mind, who would be a good senator for PA and win against Santorum in a cakewalk) but are shunned nationally (like Casey's father was) - because of one issue.

I would bet a more nuanced poll would show NEITHER side has a majority.

[amazona]

3. not so

Most Americans admit to wanting to preserve the right to abortion and even those who won't admit it in polls reserve the right to get an abortion when it's their wife or their daughter carrying a rapist's baby.

If we abandon abortion, we abandon women, which is just foolish on the face of it. Too many votes to throw away to please fundies who will never cross over into the light anyway.

We need to give more to the populist/progressive base -- not less.

[Merlin]

76. Nonsense.

"If we abandon abortion, we abandon women..."

That's just a pile of nonsense!
First--as I pointed out--it then becomes a state issue and is legal in at least 12 states as we speak.
Second, we must always fight for the right to an abortion when the mother's life is in danger, and perhaps when the fetus is severely deformed or otherwise damaged in such a way that it has no prospect for human awareness.
Third, we must fight for birth control, sex education, equal pay, and non-discrimination.
Fourth, we should be fighting now to impose on all males who impregnate a woman an absolute, solid financial liability from day one of the pregnancy. That should have been done long ago, and we Democrats should lead the fight.

[Dastard Stepchild]

5. Yes... well....

I'd still like to fight for abortion, and do not find it particularly problematic that we are losing because of this issue. When you take up a "seemingly" unpopular fight, you stand to lose a few rounds. If not the Dems, who?

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NMDemDist2]

8. reproductive slavery

rich women will still get abortions from friendly doctors or overseas

poor women will have children they can't afford and can't raise without bringing the entire family's lifestyle down to the poverty level

health care is non existent so poor women will lose teeth and bone mass for each child who will have scholastic problems due to poor early nutrition and end up in prison because there will be no opportunities for jobs or college

yeah, let's let Roe V Wade go.... who needs it anyway?

look at the polling data, abortion isn't the main wedge they use

http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

[rabid_nerd]

31. GREAT TABLES

It's a grey f'n issue, and BOTH SIDES ARE NUTS

Legal in all cases: 23%
Illegal in all cases: 20%

Legal in most/Illegal in most cases (case-by-case): 54%

Just what I thought..

Or, NOT legal in ALL cases - 77%
Or, NOT illegal in ALL cases - 80%

Even Roe v. Wade legalized 1st Term and kept 3rd term (state's right to keep) ILLEGAL.

THIS IS a centrist issue with extremist wackos calling the shots.

[George_S]

126. But it's not cut and dry either

Looks like the majority are against or think there should be stricter limits.

[janx]

10. You are kidding.

Right?

[proud_Kucitizen]

23. Sorry but I agree with

this article. I don't vote democrat based on this issue or gun control issues, I am actually against gun control but for me it's only the economic issues that encourage me to vote democrat but then I'm not very religious and brainwashed by a church.

I have wanted the democratic party to drop these issues for a long time because I don't think they should be politicized issues. We only give the Republicans ammunition they wouldn't have otherwise.

For those who are against dropping these issues, I can only say stop whining then when we keep losing elections. As much as I hate the term whining used by Repukes I feel it is appropriate here.

[blondeatlast]

36. "stop whining then when we keep losing elections..."

There is NO doubt who won both the EC and popular vote in 2000.

If we decide to "drop" these issues, I will no longer be a Democrat. Note my avatar and the fact that I'm a FOURTH generation Dem.

If we have to choose who's in or who's out on the issues, I know where I stand. My party will have abandoned ME.

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[donheld]

102. Isn't your attitude the same?

You don't like abortion so you want the democrats to abandon it. Forget about it. If i have no say over my own body then we've lost it all. I bet in your heart you want Democrats should also abandon gays and lesbians.

[Walt Starr]

107. Some issues are non-negotiable

This is one.

IF the Democrats abandon choice, they are no longer the Democratic Party.

If you want to go that direction, fine. If the party does, fine too. I'll never vote for another Democrat in my life if it does.

[VolcanoJen]

121. I'm with you, Walt.

Abandoning our pro-choice stance is an absolute deal breaker to me. There is little that is more important than the reproductive freedom of women. Abandon Roe v. Wade, and you're opening up a floodgate. Allow them to "win" that issue, and I'm not really sure what more we have going for us. It's about choice, and freedom, and if we abandon those two words, then count me out of the Democratic Party.

I'm not rolling over on Roe v Wade. I'm also not convinced, Merlin, in any way, that this election had anything to do with reproductive rights. Please don't lose sight of the fact that although the media continues to distort the impact of the "Moral Values" crowd, the truth is that < 20% of voters sited "morals" as a voting issue for them. Don't you really think this election was about the war on terrorism?

Also, if I conduct a personal poll among my female friends, I can easily tell you that even the most Republican of them supports abortion rights, and even the ones that voted for Bush are a little freaked out after the fact at the prospect of losing reproductive freedom. It's not something they bargained for, because absolutely nobody was talking about it as a campaign issue. Misguided as they are, they voted for Bush because they felt he could keep them "safe." End of story.

If Democrats push to the right, it really is time for a "third way." I think we have a much better chance of harvesting votes from the left, personally.

[Warren DeMontague]

175. There's lots of things I wish my party would stand up for

that they don't, or are wishy-washy as F*ck about.

Frankly, I want them to clearly stand up for the principle that adults should have total self-determination rights about their own bodies in so far as they are in the privacy of their own homes and don't impact anyone else's liberty. If a duffer with bone cancer in Oregon wants a dignified, pain-free exit, why the hell should John Ashcroft have any say in the matter? If a chemo patient wants to smoke pot (or anyone else over the age of 21, for that matter) what the hell is the government doing involved in any way, shape, or form? If two gay people want to get married, it should be a cause for celebration, not hysteria.

But if they ditch reproductive freedom and choice, I'm gone.

[greatauntoftriplets]

199. Same here....

Great post.

[janx]

42. This is sickening.

Winning is so much more important than principle, eh?

And besides, it seems to me that the only people who bring this up repeatedly are fundamentalists, who chiefly occupy the *Republican* party, not the Dem party.

So go ahead and capitulate to going back to the days of coathanger abortions. You'll find yourself very much alone, I think.

[sangh0]

72. So consequences don't count?

When the repukes win, and millions of children go without health care, and abortion rights are limited, you can be satisfied with the knowledge that you still have your principles, even if sticking by them harmed millions of women and children?

[salin]

81. do I read this to mean you are advocating

that the democratic party stop supporting abortion rights?

Or am I missing something.

[sangh0]

168. No

I'm suggesting we do a better job of supporting abortion rights than saying "A fetus is a parasite"

I did not see anyone explaining how saying that protects abortion rights. IMO, getting repukes elected endangers abortion rights.

[salin]

172. er... where was that in the post that you linked to?

I think that is a different thread altogether (the guy on air america thing)... this thread is specifically about abandoning support for Roe v Wade and how that would benefit the party.

[sangh0]

178. Whoops

I thought I was in another thread for a moment. Sorry about that

[salin]

213. wasn't until I read your earlier response

that I put two and two together ;-)

[Iris]

138. Of course they count. But the fact is some people obviously need

to feel more pain from the policies of the Republicans before they will come back to the Democratic Party as the party out to help common people. If we change to be more like the Republicans, what difference can we ever make?

[sangh0]

169. So the strategy is to make the majority feel pain?

That doesn't sound like a way to win support for abortion rights.

[Iris]

181. The majority has already made a decision that will make them feel pain.

"We" don't need to do anything.


On edit: The abortion platform does not need to be changed b/c eventually people's pocketbooks will have to come before their alleged morality.

[Walt Starr]

161. Soem issuess are non-negotiable

If you think this will work, lobby to get the choice plank dumped.

I'll take my leave if that happens, and I guarantee you will never have as many votes in any election ever again.

[sangh0]

177. self-delete

my post above was a mistake. I got confused, and thought I was in another thread

[Walt Starr]

205. Sorry about that

I understand getting confused about threads, especially on days when about sixteen threads are attacking various aspects of the same issue!

[212demop]

47. I didn't realize people got their opinions about gun control in church.

May I ask why you use Kucinich as your Avatar when you so clearly are not liberal on social issues?

[Merlin]

80. Plenty of people are liberal on social issues without buying into ...

every element of liberal orthodoxy.

What this person is saying makes a hell of a lot of sense. They are saying that by stretching our agenda to incorporate these particular issues which DO NOT enjoy popular support, we keep LOOSING elections. Get it?

[no_hypocrisy]

11. I'm not sure whether I'm ready to relinquish a fundamental constitutional

right, either by qualification/regulation or outright abolishment. Once you give up a constitutional right partially or entirely, there will be calls for other constitutional rights to be reconsidered as valid and worthy of protection.

Abortion will be perpetually attacked as a fundamental right in this country. Because the concept of a fertilized egg is nebulous and debatable philosophically and biologically whether it truly represents an intact fully developed human being awarded the full protection of autonomy, life, and liberty. This is not as concrete as claiming segregation is wrong as it outright discriminates against a class of people in society. They exist. They are here.

If Roe were overturned, how can you be sure that it ends with the argument of states' right to ban it? What if Congress passed either a federal statute or amended the Federal Constitution to recognized that life begins at conception? That would ban abortion in the blue states as well. And by that time, the law may be so popular that it might be passed and later upheld.

That, would lead to the deaths of women in back alleys on filthy tables with unsterilized, bacteria-ridden instruments (not necessarily medical) rather than the termination of unwanted pregnancies (represented by theoretical and potential people, not living and existing ones).

I honestly don't believe the democrats can afford to throw the red states a bone by changing their traditional stance of protecting the vulnerable citizens of this country. If they did, nobody with any power would exist to continue the protection of women seeking abortions. James Madison or John Monroe stated, "It's not always right to be popular and it's not always popular to be right." This case is a perfect example.

[Merlin]

17. Perhaps you haven't read the constitution lately.

The word "abortion" appears nowhere therein. It is a "right" only insofar as such a "right" is derived from the "right to privacy" which is also a derived right, though far more defensible than abortion.

If a fetus were scientifically determined to be a human life, surely you don't think then that such a "right" would still be found, do you? Well, then, since it can't be determined scientifically NOT to be a human life, it is not altogether illegitimate to claim that it may possibly be a human life, and therefore that--despite any right to privacy inferred from the framers' intentions--abortion, absent endangerment to the life of the mother, is the taking of a life.

"how can you be sure that it ends with the argument of states' right to ban it?"

I'm not. But I'd feel much better fighting this battle at the state level in the blue states while at the same time being able to govern the damn nation again.

[Kansas Wyatt]

40. Democratic candidates refuse to dump it back in Repukes laps

Abortion rates dropped under Clinton, but they have risen again under "Fundie" Bush. Why? Economic oppression on the middle and lower class is the biggest reason why.

Are Repukes going to provide the funding for policing back alley abortion shops & clothes hanger abortions, for the complications of botched abortion attempts, and for disabled people that will be born after attempted abortions (institutions)? Democrats should start explaining all of the ills that come with the Repukes positions.

[212demop]

49. Amen! Thank you for pointing out this UNDERREPORTED statistic.

Yet another way the red staters continue to fool themselves.

[Merlin]

83. Some of US are the ones fooling ourselves.

Some of us think we have all the time in the world to stand our ground and wait until the country comes around to our point of view--some fine day.

Meantime, the people actually WINNING elections, are ripping apart every damn thing we ever accomplished. I don't know about you, but that doesn't feel very good to me.

[VolcanoJen]

128. "...ripping apart every damn thing we ever accomplished."

Aren't you suggesting that we rip apart our own accomplishments, sort of cut our nose off despite our face, in order to be a "winner"?

If the Republicans want to ban abortion, they sure don't need any damned help from us.

[Wonk]

189. You speak for yourself. nt

[Merlin]

82. Kansas is a good example of what's happened to us since Roe.

Read "What's the Matter With Kansas" by Thomas Frank.

You'll learn that back before Roe, Kansas was the home of populists and even radical liberals.

In blue states, abortion will still be legal. So to get an abortion, somebody will have to drive up to Illinois. That's not such a big inconvenience is it? Considering that the quid pro quo would be that we could govern the country again.

[Iris]

89. But do the same people who were "populists" and "radical liberals"

still live in Kansas? It's been my experience that people who think like that and live in small towns or rural, backwards areas, eventually leave for greener pastures (or concrete pastures - anything's better than living around people who want to stay ignorant.)

[salin]

160. which democratic senators were from kansas just before rvw?

not sure but by early 80s it was too republicans (Dole and Katzenbaum) - unless both were elected in response to Roe... not sure your argument is true... not sure the change is all due to Roe. Better find out what other trends were going on before that... that need to be addressed before assuming your radical response will reverse something that doesn't seem to explain the shift in Kansas.

[lastliberalintexas]

180. Flawed premise

Roe v Wade doesn't have a damn thing to do with the Dems losing Kansas, because WE NEVER HAD IT TO LOSE. Interesting factoid about Kansas- it's had more Senators from the Populist Party than from the Dem. 2 Populists, 1 Dem, and ALL OTHERS REPUB, in the entire history of the state.

So tell me again how giving up on Roe will let us win that state *back* or *again*?


You're going after voters who didn't, wouldn't and won't vote Dem anyway. We're better off getting our base out to vote and going after the 40% of registered voters who still didn't vote this time. And that says nothing of the millions of people who are eligible to vote but don't. I say we offer them something- like economic populism- and forget the anti-choicers.

[Scout]

193. oh, of course not!

I just hope I own a car, and can afford gas money.

I just hope I can get someone to watch the 3 kids I already have.

I hope I can come up with a good lie for my boss, since I'm missing work. Not to mention my husband, who wants me to keep squirtin' out his seed.

I hope I can find a way to replace the income I'm losing by missing work, because I don't have paid sick time.

I hope I can afford meals and a hotel, 'cuz I'm too stupid to make the decision without viewing their propaganda and then going home to think about it for 24 hours.

I hope the fundie assholes outside the clinic don't hassle me too bad as I walk from my car to the clinic, several times.

I hope I can pay for the abortion, and that there are no complications or unforseen charges, because my insurance doesn't cover abortion.

I hope they build a planned parenthood in my home state, so I can afford the low-cost birth control pills I need to avoid further pregnancies. And so I can actually get the pills, because the pharmacist in my home town won't fill the prescription from my doctor.

Don't worry, it's no inconvenience for me. And I'm so happy the democrats can run the country now!

</sarcasm>


piss off ... give away your OWN individual rights if you want, leave mine alone.

[Radical Activist]

13. "But a politician can never lead public opinion."

Yes, they can if they have courage. The ones that do have made America a better place.

As far as abortion goes I think we do have to make elections about something other than abortion and gay marriage if we want to win in places that we're losing now. That doesn't mean Democrats have to become pro-life. It just means we have to give people voting against us based on those two issues some other reason to vote Democratic. We can go to rural areas and win by focusing on economic populist themes without abandoning other Democratic ideals like freedom of choice. I think you present a false choice if you claim we have to become pro-life in order to diffuse the issue.

[atreides1]

14. Thanks for Saying it

Now the Democrats can be just like the Republicans, a political party that has no principles, and will sellout a group just to win in politics.

So, while we drop abortion and a woman's right to choose, let's also drop our opposition to the "War on Terror", and join with our Republican "brothers and sisters", and tell them that they are correct in their theory that Iraq helped to plan 9/11, and that it was Clinton's fault.

I mean let's review all of the things that the Democratic party supported, and drop those that the religious fanatics don't agree with. Hell, let's invite Jerry Falwell to a Democratic function so that we can get his wisdom about what is acceptable to the Xtian Right, and offer that agenda in 2006?

It's talk like this that has convinced to re-register as an Independent.

I like this site, it has provided me with much information and has allowed me to realize that leopards who change their spots are not only to be found in the Republican party.

[212demop]

53. and let's not quibble about the patriot act anymore-

After all, I've done nothing wrong. What do I care if the cable guy goes through my undies while I'm not looking?

And who cares about those signs going up with "George Bush. Our Leader." Scary. Hell yeah. He's not running for anything. It's propaganda. But so what? Big brother here so soon? Fuggedaboutit!

[matcom]

16. how about

NO FUCKING WAY & OVER MY DEAD FUCKING BODY!

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

74. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Merlin]

85. Oh, Jesus. Rape is an obvious exception. So is the mother's health.

Not only that but--as I pointed out--abortion on demand will still be available in ALL the blue states. So maybe you have to travel. But considering that the quid pro quo would be that we can govern the nation again that's not such a bad trade-off.

[matcom]

94. yes, it is an AWFUL tradeoff

sorry. you and I, being MEN, have NO FUCKING BUSINESS even SUGGESTING what rights a WOMAN has in red, blue, green, purple or ANY OTHER COLORED STATE!

you ASSUME that women will "be able to travel" to a "blue" state. what if they CAN'T? what if those blue states, such as MA where I live with REPUKE Governors, decide to ban interstate travel?

this is a fucking MORONIC proposition and not AT ALL thought out and frankly, IMHO, a vile, abomination to all that is Progressive and Democratic in whatever society we have left.

i'll take Bush* for another 10 years before i stop fighting for a woman's fundamental rights

[Bush was AWOL]

184. Do you support abortion on demand or should their be restrictions?

I think abortion is brutal, but I still think it is necessary to be legal in some instances. I've been done the abortion road before, and I honestly don't think women should be allowed to have abortions at any point in the pregnancy.

[salin]

103. of course... gop legislation generally no longer makes those "obvious"

exceptions.

So maybe you can travel.. thats a good solution... NOT
Tell me how that works for an impoverished young mother with no access to transportation and no resources?

What makes you assume that once emboldened by success at the national level that the rr would not pull every stop out to change states laws and with the democratic party out of the game (for political reasons of course....) what makes you think any state would stay legal?

Back to Prolesunited question - as a white male .. what rights that will can have an immediate impact on YOUR life are you willing to give up for "the good of the party?"

[matcom]

104. none Salin

isn't THAT OBVIOUS??

[salin]

113. men should be held to slightly stronger anti-deadbeat dad status

wonder if that includes aggressive DNA testing for all alleged males partners of each pregnant female - and if it includes garnished wages from prenatal period through high school graduation?

Or maybe there should be a national dna database of all male babies when they are born, kept on file, and refered to at the birth of each baby in America in order to enforce stricter accountability of male parents.

[Walt Starr]

114. But you can't do a DNA test until after the birth by Merlins rules

because there is a chance that the DNA test will result in an aborted pregnancy.

So the male accused has to pay for nine months before he can prove his innocence.

dontcha love it, now men will have to prove they are innocent and may have to pay anyway!

[Walt Starr]

109. Rape will not be an exception

The argument against it is that you are punishing the child for the crimes of the father.

IF you get your way, there will be NO exceptions. That is the ultimate goal.

[salin]

122. case in point... the late term abortion laws that have been struck down

were done so, I believe, because they made NO exceptions.

[Warren DeMontague]

173. Bullshit. When Reality intrudes,

the pro-lifers will argue (in fact, they already do) that women will start lying about being raped or claiming health exemptions to "sneak" abortions.

Which should make people wonder if it's really worth forcing a woman who would lie to strangers that she was raped, so she could get an abortion, to bear a child against her will.

[Iris]

91. Kisses to matcom!

:* :* :* :* :* :* :*:*:*:*:*:*:*

[ScreamingMeemie]

206. You Rock matcom!

:yourock:

[charlie]

18. Republicans are also in a tough spot

They own the gov't, free and clear. They don't have the luxury of pleading Democratic obstruction anymore. And the anti-abortion wing knows it. They want their reward now.

I think we oughta hang tough. Defend Roe, as always. If we lose, it's out of our hands and we'll get the votes of moderates who never thought abortion access could be curtailed. If we win, Republicans face a revolt in their ranks.

[Merlin]

20. There's a lot of merit to what you say.

But if/when Roe goes, if we then use abortion "rights" as the primary weapon in our political arsenal--which as things stand now is almost a certainty--then the current division will stand. The Republicans will be able to keep those we would otherwise have by simply claiming we are still out to make abortion legal.

I would like to see enough of a diversity of opinion on this subject to keep our party from making it the primary plank in it's platform, so our other agenda items have a chance to be heard and so we have a chance to regain power.

[charlie]

33. I look at it this way

If we successfully defend Roe, anti-abortionists are faced with two choices -- a party that advocates abortion access and a party that won't deep six Roe when given a chance. They're fucked.

If we're unsuccessful, we'll still be the ones fighting in state legislatures. We'll have the "stigma" anyway, even if we roll over and cede every state house below the Mason Dixon and on the praries. Republicans will make sure we carry the taint, even if it's deleted from our national platform.

In any case, I think there's time to see how our current stance plays out. Ball's in the Republican court, they've got to shit or get off the pot. Let's see if they fracture before we think about concessions.

[wildflowergardener]

21. It would make independent parties look better

If the Democrat party gives in on Roe Vs. Wade, I would not stay with them. I guess we'd have to go to that runoff style voting so my new party that I switched to would have a chance to win. How many other people would you lose by doing this? What's the point of having two parties if they are both the same?

It is not the government's right to make this decision for me, or anybody else.

Meg

[Paladin]

22. Welcome To The Post-Election World, Democrats

In the face of the Kerry defeat, there are interest groups intent on getting the party to shit-can as many of its core principles as possible, in a massive rightward lurch. This thread calls for walking away from our support of reproductive rights; the gun militants have been hard at work trying to get us to make the NRA happy (check out DU's "Gun Dungeon" for egregious evidence of this); I'm speculating that groups telling us to abandon gay rights, environmental safeguards, and God knows what else, are in existence now or are being formed---all by "Good Democrats" who only have the best interests of the party at heart, of course. This pressure is only going to build with time; the advice in this thread to "grow a spine" ought to be adopted by every true Democrat, and immediately.....

[noamnety]

25. This makes sense, sure.

Saving a life is more important than a person's right to control what happens to their own body.

That's why we have laws forcing every eligible donor to give blood. It's why we have laws requiring everyone to register as bone marrow donor. It's why people are forced to donate kidneys anytime they are a match for anyone who needs it.

Right? Anything else would be morally indefensible?

Or do men still get the right to chose what they do with their bodies, even if lives are lost as a result?

[Feathered Fish]

26. You are not proposing any alternative

So it really wouldn't bother you if RvsW was overturned because it would still be easy for women to have abortions? Because it will ultimately cause the downfall of the Repub. Party? Or at the very least cause them to lose an election?

You compare this issue with slavery which, to me, is completely offensive. You are basically stating that YOU believe that abortion is morally indefensible and it is the cause of many losses in elections, just like the slow democrat response to slavery. Give me a break! If the dems gave in to fundamentalist pressure on the abortion issue, then really what do we have? Not a party that millions of women would want to align themselves with. It would just alienate us and, quite frankly, steer our attention away from more important issues and make us contemplate wedge issues which only serves the Republicans better.

As for your opinion that the 'keep your laws off my body' argument is somewhat lame, you are telling me that my body and my decisions are not that important and that it would serve the dems better if I drop it. No, no, no. I will not have it. It is a damn good argument thank you very much. I'll be damned if I am going to give up my fundamental right to privacy just so Dems can win because once they win, what will it matter.

Abortion did not cause the outcome of the election. Don't fool yourself.

[Merlin]

30. You didn't read it clearly.

"You are basically stating that YOU believe that abortion is morally indefensible..."

No. I said exactly the opposite. But I said that it is LEGITIMATE to believe that abortion is morally indefensible.

And I said abortion is POLITICALLY indefensible. That's just a fact. Exhibit "A" is the 53% of white women who voted for Bush.

[Feathered Fish]

34. The comparison with slavery

is what led me to that conclusion.

In many ways, abortion is similar to the slavery issue. Then, too, the Democratic party was slow to grasp the power of a determined religious movement. Then they were called abolitionists. Today, even liberals see most of them as heroic and correct. As a result of its failure to respond to the moral movement against slavery, the Democratic party lost control of US politics for 50 years at the federal level, from 1860 to 1912, except for 2 terms. Are we in the midst of a similar--or worse--run now?

To me, you are thowing the idea that in the future, Dems and other liberals are going to consider anti-choice advocates as 'heroic and correct', especially if we give up on the issue and win an election. I don't think this is the case.

[Merlin]

88. You don't "think" that's the case. But neither did those others in 1860.

We don't know which way this could go. If at some point science settles on the notion that human life begins at conception--or some point during the first trimester--then views will eventually change considerably over time.

I'm not saying it will happen. I'm saying it's possible.

But that's not really the reason for bringing up slavery. The reason for bringing it up is that then--like now--we were unable to appreciate the incredible potency of the moral feelings the other side has on this incredibly powerful issue. Instead we ridicule them and stereotype them all as fundies. But that just ain't true. Huge percentages have gone over because of abortion, and would come back if it were no longer on our agenda.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Iris]

52. Those 53% can also be found in great numbers on Bush donation lists

with figures like $10,000 and $100,000 next to there professional title of "Homemaker."

So you can pretty much guess what an unplanned pregnancy meanst to them --- Nada. Except maybe a nice new tennis braclet after the delivery.

[Merlin]

90. Oh, please. You're saying that 53% of American women have that...

kind of money! That doesn't even pass the laugh test. If that were the case, we wouldn't have to fight for other women's rights like equal pay. Give us a break. If you want to debate, great. But please do it with honest numbers.

[Iris]

92. I'm saying that a good many of that 53% can be found on the

Republican donor list with the job title "Homemaker" listed next to their names. Equal pay? What the hell are YOU talking about?

My POINT WAS - their HUSBANDS gave the maximum donation to Bush for themselves and then gave the maximum donation again for their WIVES!!! Because the last time I checked, Homemakers make about $0,000,000,000.00 per year.

GET IT?

[the_outsider]

136. a majority of "WHITE" women. not American women.

Yes, let's talk with honest numbers. You started with "white" women and then changed to American women. 75% non-white women voted for Kerry. Overall 51% women voted for Kerry an only 48% voted for *.

[212demop]

55. How is it just "A Fact"

that it's politically indefensible.

And what makes you think those 53% voted based on Roe?

Again, a majority of women do not want it overturned. Actual women will die if they have to get back alley abortions, or go to term on dangerous pregancies, or get kicked in the stomach by boyfriends who can't deal.

That's not an issue. Those are women who will live or die based on these laws. Fighting to keep choice is not an issue- it is life or death. Why do these women's lives matter less than the fetuses?

on edit add: and what were the numbers on ALL women, not just white women?

Thank you for the information in advance.

[Merlin]

98. I think I've already illustrated that. I'll try it one more time.

That it's POLITICALLY indefensible is proven by the Democratic party's abysmal experience with it over the past 30 years. If you don't know what I'm talking about, then please reread my article.

Something is politically indefensible when you can't argue your case head on. We can NOT ARGUE FOR abortion rights head on. We can't say, "We demand women have the right to abortion on demand." Because abortion is a horrible thing, by everybody's admission. So we couch our arguments with euphemistic phrases like "a woman's right to choose," as if we can fool people into believing that makes the thing less ugly.

As to why the numbers aren't for ALL women, that's a simple answer. Minority women have many, many issues that the depend on the Democratic party to deliver. It goes way, way beyond abortion. And--by the way--by continually losing elections, we aren't able to deliver those badly needed things--like a decent education, day care, health care, jobs for minorities and on and on.

Obviously there must be exceptions for the life of the mother and for aborting a fetus which has no chance of ordinary survival or of an aware, human life. We must also come up with a rational policy on rape exceptions.

Finally, I say again, abortion will still be legal in all the blue states. So somebody wanting on in a red state will have to travel. In a blue state, nothing will change.

What will change is that we will be able to govern the country again.

[Scout]

203. Because abortion is a horrible thing, by everybody's admission.

no, it's not a horrible thing. It just is ... it's a medical procedure.

Everybody does not believe that abortion is a horrible thing. What poll did you see that talked to "everybody?"

[VolcanoJen]

163. What evidence do you have that the 53% of women who voted Bush...

... did so only because they are anti-choice and believe abortion should be illegal, and felt that voting for Bush would make that a reality?

[ScreamingMeemie]

210. 53% of women voted for Bush because they are either A. hideously

wealthy B. Stupid as a box of rocks or C. twisted by fundamentalist church teachings. There could possibly be a D, and that would be because they are evil.

Link please? Or did you read this in your church bulletin?

[OneBlueSky]

35. once again, we're playing right into their hands . . .

doing precisely what they want us to be doing . . . they want to divert us from the real issues, so they throw out red meat topics like abortion to keep us occupied . . . and we fall for it every time . . . what we should be talking about is joining together to build a more humane, more just, and more sustainable culture (or, for marketing purposes, a more humane, more just, and more sustainable America) . . . we can start by discussing ending corporate governance . . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2778474&mesg_id=2778474

I don't want to discuss abortion . . . or gay marriage . . . or prayer in school . . . or any of the other peripheral issues they bait us with . . . I want to discuss saving this country and the planet from fascism . . . and building a true democracy . . . and restoring citizen authority over corporations, and over our government . . . until we start doing that, we're just playing their little game . . . and losing . . .

[eleny]

37. I doubt he was elected in the first place

My disagreement with the premise that he was actually elected leads to why we shouldn't be giving up the fight to maintain legal abortion in the U.S. An election can be stolen but that doesn't change how we feel about going back to unsafe abortions. And that's the crux. Abortion was made legal in the first place to provide for safe abortions for women.

[davsand]

38. Abandon women's rights and every other progressive view--do it NOW!!!

And while we're at it, let's be real sure to fuck over the GLBT folks, the African American population, the Latino/Latinas, the folks who don't practice "Our" form of religion, and anyone who isn't rich enough to fall into the higher income brackets. For good measure let's also be real sure to kill off a bunch of species and pollute the fresh water we have left...

WTF is this? I'm on a Progressive board and I'm seeing shit like this? I thought for a second there that I'd ended up at Freeptardland by mistake--or maybe even Falwell hell.

I've been a member of the Dem party for a long time, and an activist for specific issues (specifically abortion and GLBT rights) even longer. The day the Dem party starts to follow advice like that, my ass is gone along with every bit of my energy and cash. I suspect I'm not the only one that feels that way.

We lost an election. OK. We got raped when the SCOTUS selected the asswipe back in 2000, no doubt about it, but we lost this last election.

OUR Dem party chose a candidate in a primary election. That candidate did not appeal to enough of the middle of the road voters. THAT is the upshot of it all.

I am not gonna go into a discussion of WHY Kerry didn't appeal to enough people to win--because the answers to that are too vague and too nebulous to explore here. He sure as hell didn't lose because he was pro choice. We DO know THAT much. Hell, Clinton WON two terms and he was pro choice. We elected any number of pro-choice Senators and Congress critters this time, and we have done so in the past.

It isn't about the occupation of my (or any woman's) uterus. It is about framing the abortion debate.

When was the last time you saw ANYBODY say, "Yep, abortion really sucks. Can't say we like it much--sure as hell no woman WANTS to have to face a pregnancy she didn't choose to have--but RIGHT NOW abortion is the only option we have unless we want to kill off a bunch of young women who choose NOT to have a baby they don't want."

WHY aren't we out there pressing for better contraceptive technology and better availability? Some basic sex ed probably might help too...

WHY aren't we out there talking about reducing the NEED for it by making contraceptive technology so good and so widely available that no woman EVER has to face the fear and pain of being pregnant against her will?

No--WAIT--Let's just shut the fuck up and sit down and LET women die for the sin of having sex.

Let's just shut up and play dead while a whole new crop of our young women watch friends die from back alley butchers or the misuse of knitting needles and coat hangers. Let's watch a bunch of parents weep when they bury their daughter and her classmates.

YEAH--that will help us win elections! SURE IT WILL!!!

GAWD. I can't begin to express my disgust.

Laura

[rbnyc]

214. Great post, Laura.

My god, I couldn't believe this shit when I came in here tonight. :puke: I'm so sick of this way of thinking. We give the repukes their strength by being afraid to stand up for our values, by being afraid to differentiate ourselves. And this ignorant post suggests we do more of the same, make ourselves more like the enemy, and to let women pay for it with our blood. For what? So we can win? How is it winning if we feel we have to adopt the opposition's platform to do so? Especially since we don't have to do that. Especially since 2000 and 2002 AND 2004 should have made it pretty damned fucking clear that our inability to differentiate ourselves is one serious motherfucking liability.

What crap! What complete crap.

Thanks for your sane and right on post, Laura. You said it better that I could have at this point.

[prolesunited]

39. And as a white male

what fundamental freedoms and rights will you be sacrificing for the good of the party?

[Iris]

48. How about every male REQUIRED to donate a kidney or other vital organ

before reaching the age of 50.

What would be progressive about forcing women to endure unplanned pregnancies and all the social and economic ills and inequalities that result from too many children too soon or simply the because one doesn't have the ability to control her own destiny?

[212demop]

56. or involuntary vasectomies.

[Iris]

60. Or the 47% of us women who voted for Kerry could form a sexual boycott.

Then all the progressive guys would have to screw the likes of Ann Coulter.

[212demop]

62. Well, it wouldn't take much for me to be part of that boycott since

no one sane ever asks me out. I would be depriving no special someone.

Only 47% of women went for Kerry? Hmmm. That sucks.

[Iris]

65. actually I was just referring to a post up the thread.

I have no idea if that figure is accurate.

The whole subject just pisses me off royally. Almost as bad as blaming Teresa H. Kerry for the Democrats inability to win an election.

[212demop]

68. Total agreement. It's all not so well veiled sexism- pure and simple.

Or Mysoginism- really. Since this is so much more extreme than a pat on the bum (not to belittle that). But it's all about putting everything- political goals, the fetus, etc.. above a woman's life.

[the_outsider]

112. No. Merlin was only talking about white women. They went 53% *

Overall 51% women voted for Kerry. Among non-white women, 75% voted for Kerry.

[salin]

84. I've noticed this question NEVER gets answered.

this and other threads make me realize that rush really has won.

[Merlin]

101. Yeah, well I just answered it. n/t

.

[Merlin]

100. First it's not a "fundamental" right. Second, males should be held to...

much stricter standards when it comes to pregnancy.

Men who impregnate a woman should be financially accountable from day one of the pregnancy under strict rules of payment enforceable by intermittent jail sentences as well as court-ordered salary tapping.

[salin]

106. so men should get mandatory dna tests if a woman claims

that he slept with her?

[Walt Starr]

111. Can;t happen until after birth

because DNA tests on fetuses can result in *gasp* aborting the pregnancy!

[Merlin]

129. Not true.

There are ways to get DNA from a fetus without damaging it. If a man denies paternity, and a woman is forced to undergo the expense of a procedure to get dna from the fetus, then the man should have to pay for all of it--and something additional for inconvenience to the woman.

[Walt Starr]

132. You'd better check your facts

You need amnionic fluid to test the DNA of a fetus. Obtaining it requires a needle be inserted into the womb. One of the risks of doing this is miscarriage.

Ask any OB/GYN.

[Merlin]

127. What's the problem? Too tough on men? Aw geeze.

I thought men were the ones I didn't want to have to make any sacrifices.

Damn, you folks better get your stories straight.

[salin]

131. no, I am checking to see if mandatory dna testing

just on "accusation" is part of the deal so that we can find the fathers... because a BIG part of the problem is that of nonidentification of fathers. So are you up for it? Perhaps a male dna directory that to which the dna of new borns can be compared?

Just wondering how far into YOUR rights you are willing to go to make sure this happens?

[da_chimperor]

197. Simple answer: NO FUCKING WAY.

Thought I'd get in on the flamefest to say: if we abandon our values for the sake of power, doesn't that make us just as low and the extreme right? We've made mistakes the way the issue is framed. We don't need to drop it, we need to re-think our approach and win over the independents. If we have a better idea how to handle things, and can prove it, we'll win. Far too much is done today that is 'popular'. Fuck the bible thumping fundies. We're after the rational people.

[prolesunited]

207. Excuse me

You're saying I don't have the fundamental right to control MY body and my future. I guess we truly see where your head is at.

And as far as making men accountable, exactly how is *that* going to work in your perfect world. We already have laws in place that provide for court-ordered child support and allow garnishment of wages and imprisonment of deadbeat dads.

And, guess what? It doesn't work. If a man doesn't want to pay, he finds ways around it. He hides assets in other people's names, moves to different states, job hops before the garnishment kicks in.

In addition, women spend countless hours beating their heads against the wall trying to collect on this support while not being able to fend for their children. In my county, they just published a list of how far some of these men were in arrears and how old the children are. Try $50,000 to $70,000 and the children are teens and young adults.

In addition, we don't even want to spend the money to help take care of the children we have. What do you propose we do with the millions more added to the system. If people have adequate health care, jobs, security for taking a leave, child care, etc., they would be much less likely to feel that they had to make such a difficult choice.

Did you know that the number of abortions INCREASED under Bush? Women and their families do not feel equipped to take care of a new life? What if she is one of the millions without health care or a job?

I really don't like the idea of abortion, but understand why some feel the necessity for it. If you force a woman to carry a baby to term that she is unwilling and unable to care for, what kind of life is that child going to lead? Already we have a seeming epidemic of abused and abandoned babies.

What you are proposing will do NOTHING to improve the quality of life for people. In fact, it will like increase the poverty and squalor in which millions are living and lead to an epidemic of abandonment and abuse.

But, I guess that would all be OK if we win.

[donsu]

43. you sound like a MCP - women's wombs are not bargaining chips

nt

[Name removed]

105. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[salin]

119. irony. n/t

[Iris]

133. Just because the truth hurts, doesn't make donsu a jerk. n/t

[212demop]

44. Actually we didn't lose this issue- 60% do not want to see it overturned

[Mandate My Ass]

63. Stop making sense

Here, try this color kool aid.

Women must surrender reproductive choice so that men with a (D) after their names, who suck infinitesimally less than men with an (R) after their names, can wrest control of the country back.

Homicide by the impregnator is the number one cause of death of pregnant women in the US.

We have more children living in poverty here than in the 17 other industrialized nations in the world and the least number of social programs to deal with this.

At least 39 million people go to be hungry here each night.

Poverty and unemployment are two of the main factors which lead to child abuse.

Poor neglected children tend to have children earlier than their parents had them and to have more children than they can care for.

Only one in ten children whose families are eligible for child care subsidies actually receive them and those that do find they cannot afford quality child care.

Unintended pregnancy rates are highest among young, low-income black and hispanic women whose inability to afford prenatal care increased their chances of having children with birth defects and locking them and their children into an endless cycle of poverty.

Forget all that namby pamby bullshit.

We must be morally superior like the repukes and pretend that the tragedies and outrages endured by women and children pale into insignificance in comparison to the almighty, exalted zygote. Politically speaking, of course. :eyes:

[212demop]

67. Bravo!

:)

[Merlin]

115. What a completely asinine pile of nonsense.

You've got the unmitigated gall to complain about taking rational steps to win elections and then you bitch about all the other things we should be doing something about but can't because we sacrifice everything to this single issue.

You know, if we had power, we could get the fucking prenatal care the minorities--and other women--need.

If we won back the federal government, we could do something about the poor, neglected children, and those who go hungry.

If we avoided your approach and actually thought about what I said in my article, we could start winning again. Then we could be get child care, health care, and all those other fucking things.

And one more thing. If we were able to win back all those demographics we lost after Roe, we would be able to win elections and prevent the wholesale dismantlement of every godam thing we've ever fought for--including abortion rights.

Namby pamby my ass.

[Walt Starr]

116. The asinine thing is suggesting a move that would decimate the Dems

because you would lose your core base,

Sorry, but thems the facts. Do it and I become even more anti-Democratic than I am anti-republican, and there will be millions more like me.

[Merlin]

130. Sorry. The Democratic party is NOT based on abortion.

If you think it is, you just have no idea what the hell this party is all about.

Somehow I think you're smarter than that.

[Walt Starr]

134. No, I think YOU'RE the one who has no clue what this party is about

Be a Vichy, I don't care. If the Dems abandon this core issue, fine, I'll be as Anti-Dem as I am Anti-GOP.

And I guarantee you, there are millions more who will do the same, and those assholes whose votes you're after will still vote GOP. end result, you Whig the Dems.

[salin]

137. have to consider that we didn't used to be the party

of voting for unprovoked wars - but many who were against the fiasco were told we needed to vote this way in order to win (and we didn't win anyway)... we didn't used to be the party of the perpetual tax cut and unending deficits (in the reagan years we actually fought this stuff - remember that...) but many dems stopped taking on that fight...

at what point do we stop believing that the democratic party will remain standing for the issues you list earlier? Save social security? Seems to have been some defectors on a slew of issues that have exacerbated the ss issue... Since we want corporate political donations (so we can compete, and win...) will we really push for the necessary increases in the minimum wage to stave off poverty for fully employed workers? When pharma gives so much...and we need it to compete... will we really support solutions that will actually lower perscription drug costs... that would bite the hand so to speak...

Walt's reaction isn't just about abortion - it is about being asked to compromise on issues time and time again with the assumption that we will always vote dem (because the alternative is worse) to the point where one has to wonder will the party actually fight to preserve economic opportunity and civil protections for workers? for those in poverty? for the middle class? Really? But to do so might lose votes....

[Walt Starr]

142. Yup, you have to draw a line somewhare

This far and no further!

Dumping choice is a deal breaker for me. Fuck the party at the point it dumps choice, it no longer would be my party.

[Merlin]

146. How about drawing it on the side where we have a godam majority.

Instead of drawing it someplace where we're alienating millions who used to vote with us...

[Walt Starr]

149. BUT YOU WON'T HAVE A FUCKING MAJORITY

The LOONS you go after by dumping choice WILL STILL VOTE FOR THE FUCKING REPUBLICAN.

AND YOU LOSE MILLIONS OF OTHERWISE LOYAL DEMS LIKE ME BY BEING THIS COMPLETELY MORONIC!!!!!

[NMDemDist2]

192. most of the world and all of the western world has legal abortion

WASHINGTON -- Most of the world's women live in countries where abortion is legal, but this is still an issue that sparks controversy even decades after the courts have ruled.

About 61 percent of the global population lives in the 54 countries that have laws authorizing abortion on broad social and economic grounds; the other 39 percent are in the 97 countries that generally forbid abortion, according to the pro-abortion Center for Reproductive Law and Policy in New York.
http://www.euthanasia.com/globe.html

so we should go buck the western world on abortion like we already do on the death penalty huh?

it's OK to have a 3rd world country as long as the Democrats run it?

screw that, people die for principles like this and labor laws and freedom of speech etc etc

this is a absolute non negotiable issue for me (and I don't have children, never will at my age and never had an abortion)

[Merlin]

108. Bullshit. Depends on how you ask the question. And in the poll

that counted, 53% of white women voted for Bush.

[loyalsister]

50. It wasn't framed properly

That was the problem during the last election.
I didn't realize that my mom was going to vote for Bush. After the fact, when I pointed out that the abortion rate had gone up during the Bush presidency, she turned white.
She was very upset.
Kerry should have used that. Legal, safe, and RARE is the position he should have taken on that. The way Clinton helped us get there was through sex ed based in reality.
The day Democrats abandon us is the day I leave and slam the door on my way out. This abortion argument has never ever ever been about "life." It is and always has been about controlling women. The Bush admin had an opportunity to reduce the abortion rate considerably by allowing the approval of OTC sales of emergency contraception. They said no. Because, those wanton young women would have been more inclined to have been getting their education, less inclined to be tied down with babies, getting married before they're ready, or at all. Then there's that- what was that tragedy called? Intentional childlessness? Women working, and all of those other horrible things corrupting our society.
It's not about fewer or even no abortions for them.
If you want fewer abortions support choice.

[janx]

51. Let me get this straight, Merlin...

You want to bargain your politics using the reproductive health of women?

Sorry. That's not for sale.

[matcom]

77. don't worry janx....

HE

is willing to sacrafice

[ulysses]

54. I suppose it was only a matter of time

before the "we must ditch our values" crew got around to reproductive rights...

[Fenris]

59. This isn't the first post related to this, unfortunately.

Perhaps the original poster would like to explain why a Republican voter (which is indeed the type of person he wishes to court) would go with a party pandering to their abortion beliefs when the Republicans have been firmly committed to the anti-abortion ideology for at least the past 20 years if not longer?

I'm reminded of the fate of the Whig party, which attempted to cater to both Northern Whigs (who were less inclined to slavery) and Southern Whigs and Democrats(who wished to uphold and expand slavery). In the end, the pro-slavery voters in the South voted for the Democrats, knowing full well that the Whigs could provide no better protection for the institution of slavery than the Democrats, who were by and large solidly pro-slavery. And in the North, the anti-slavery Whigs abandoned the party and eventually would form much of the core of the anti-slavery, pro-union Republicans.

Trying to cater to the opposition will only win you enemies within your own party.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

124. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[212demop]

58. There's no changing Merlin's mind. Why hang around here?

It's too frustrating.

[okasha]

61. Not acceptable.

White evangelical women who voted Republican on this issue did so for religious reasons. You won't lure them away by throwing women overboard unless you also are willing to throw over gay rights, racial minorities, reasonable gun laws, environmental protections and a number of other progressive causes.

White affluent women who voted Republican on this issue did so because they know they and their daughters can always pay for an abortion elsewhere if they need one. They're not voting Democratic because they'll lose their tax cut.

End of story.

Okasha

[BattyDem]

66. And while we're at it ...

Let's stop fighting for civil rights, including gay rights, because the 50 million people who voted for * hate minorities and we'll never get elected if we continue to insist on equal rights for all.

Let's also stop fighting for environmental protections because the 50 million people who voted for * don't care if our air and water is poisoning us and we'll never get elected if we continue to insist on a safe, clean environment.

And about that "separation of church and state" thing ... come on, guys - why do we keep insisting on this? Christianity is the only religion that people should be practicing, so why shouldn't our laws be based on it? After all, the Christian God is the only true God. The 50 million people who voted for * obviously agree with his extreme religious beliefs and we'll never get elected if we continue to insist that all religions are valid and equal.

:grr:

Why is it that when we talk about "giving in" to the RW, or at least compromising with them, reproductive freedom is always the first thing on the table? There are so many wedge issues in this country - the Repugs made sure of that and they always use them to stir up hatred and fear - yet it's always the women's issue that some Dems are willing to sacrifice.

No one would dare suggest that minorities give up fighting for equal rights. No one would dare suggest that people give up the religion of their choice to practice a government-sanctioned religion. But women who want control over their own body and their own reproductive choices? Screw them! Come on, ladies ... take one for the team! :eyes:

Elaine Boosler has a great line about abortion: "If men could get pregnant, then abortion would be a God-given right!"

My body, my choice. End of discussion.

[robbedvoter]

69. Hey, Vichy Democrats, abandon this:

I for one long abandoned your middle class wishy washy believe in nothing ways. I hope you don't get any!
PS. You are not my fellow anything. Have a pleasant bending.
One more thing: your friends, that you want to please so much don't really give a s* about abortion, values or any of this BS. No more than a rapist cares about sex. It's a power play.
When the V chip was offeren, none of them bought it. They just want to force me to get it. So, give in, it always works wonders in a power play.
No need to ask if you are a guy. Karma will get to you anyway.

[The Flaming Red Head]

70. Enlightened & white in the same papragraph,

Merlin?

Is this intentional?

("In November, a majority of white women voted to elect one of the worst Presidents in our history to a second term. It is a startling fact revealing that enlightened women have evidently not been successful in educating other women about the importance of abortion "rights.")

and

(We have today what is undeniably a zealous Christian movement against abortion. Some of us ridicule and deride and condemn true believers. But that is an arrogant and foolish view. These folks are not idiots. Go into any church in the country on a Sunday morning and take a good look at them; listen to their voices. Hear their songs and prayers. Observe their expressions. These people are like us. They believe deeply in their cause. They are middle and lower class Americans. Many are articulate. All are fervent. And they are, by and large, truly convinced that abortion is morally indefensible.)

[Iris]

79. yeah and they are "truly convicentedthat abortion is moraly indefensible"

until they or one of their daughters needs one.

Also, see up this thread - a great numbe of these white some are able to contribute 1,000's of dollars even though their occupation is "homemaker" which, last I heard, pays $0.00 per hour. So do you think they really care what happens to a poor girl or woman who ends up with an unplanned pregnancy?

[The Flaming Red Head]

99. And the rep poll challangers used the same tactics as Op Rescue

used to block the clinics. I wonder if there is a master list, somewhere that we could cross reference?

[Cats Against Frist]

71. Why pander to that particular group, though??

Because those who are piously religious enough to disregard the Constitution, probably don't care a lot about other civil rights, in the face of scripture.

For me -- being a libertarian socialist -- it makes more sense to fiercely uphold the civil liberties angle and support the abolishment of gun control and perhaps laud federalism (which is what you're suggesting we do with abortion) on other issues -- such as taxes, regulations, welfare systems, education, etc.

The same argument could be made -- in the blue states, hopefully, people would support progressive measures at the state level, with the added benefit of being able to retain blue-state tax monies as well as have their government more decentralized -- meaning closer to them -- as an impetus to steward democracy.

If we're going to "give the GOP something" in order to win votes, I say we give up the state socialist idealism, rather than civil rights. I support helping the unfortunate, but if it came down to helping the unfortunate or having control over my own body -- the unfortunate can take a hike. I'd take all ten of the Amendments in the Bill of Rights -- and a few of the later ones, over any progressive, state socialist ideals.

Just my opinion. I'm not saying you're totally wrong -- because someone is bound to say that I'm totally wrong for being wary of an overpowerful federal government. Being a woman, with a uterus, I guess I'd rather play to the libertarian male, than to the sentimental Christo-fascist.

[Walt Starr]

86. If you abandon choice, I might as well vote REpublican

Fuck the Democratic PArty if it abandons a core value!

[Merlin]

117. Core value my fucking ass.

It wasn't a "core value" until 1973 came along. Before that we lived with it. It wasn't pretty. But it was NEVER a part of the Democratic party agenda until AFTER Roe.

And if you read what I fucking wrote you'd know that even with Roe gone, abortion would still be legal in all the blue states.

[Walt Starr]

118. I read what you wrote but what you wrote was completely assinine

and I say fine, abandon choice and lose every fucking election from now till the end of time because millions of people like me would never vote for another Democrat.

[salin]

125. heck walt - they don't need or want blue state voters, I guess...

let 'em try to win just on the red states... now that is an interesting strategy...

[Merlin]

139. Yeah, sure. The blue states will go red if we blow off abortion on demand.

What a completely ridiculous assertion.

[salin]

143. if we keep breaking the ties that bind blue to dem

at what point do they look elsewhere? This isn't just about abortion... sort of abortion as a straw and a camel's back.

[salin]

147. "abortion on demand"

now I see where this is coming from... some catch phrases are just so telling...

[Merlin]

152. It's not a catch phrase. It's an important distinctive description.

Abortion on demand is different from abortion in the event of rape or abortion to save the mother's life or abortion in the event of a a fetus that is deformed or unable to enjoy a human existence.

[Walt Starr]

158. Bullshit, it's a cach phrase invented by Pat Robem$ome

and you fucking know it!

[George_S]

164. I didn't know it....

... but got yelled at anyway. They frame the issues better. Obviously, they control all branches of government.

There are few posts in this thread that frame the issue well either, but a few are excellent and convincing.

[salin]

162. then why do all the repub amendments give no exceptions?

they let go of the "exceptions" thing in the mid 90s or so. Now its ALL abortions and the phrase is used as propoganda for knee jerk responses.

[VolcanoJen]

176. Well...

... count me out of the Democratic Party if we abandon the issue of reproductive freedom.

Anyone care to get in line behind me? Actually, I think I'm behind Walt Starr, and I see matcom up there, and...

Merlin, you'll never win an election this way. Don't you see it? Traditional Democratic voters LIKE ME will abandon their party faster than you can say "speculum" if the right to safe, legal abortion is taken away from ANY American woman, regardless of which color state she lives in.

[Name removed]

144. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Walt Starr]

151. No. you're the one arguing spoiled brat politics

Choice is the straw that breaks the camels back. You will lose ten votes for every vote you MIGHT pick up with such an asinine move!

[salin]

120. no, we read that in your scenario they stay legal

but if the dem party backs away from the issue - who will fight the emboldened republicans (emboldened by their NATIONAL win) to keep it legal in blue states?

[Walt Starr]

123. But if we give up Paris, we keep the South of France and Morrocco!

Dontcha love the Vichy mentality?

[Merlin]

140. Guess what. If we back away, we can get back the Papes and farm belt.

That means we win back control of the federal government.

That means the republicans wouldn't have a pot to piss in.

[Walt Starr]

145. And lose the Northeast and California

Great strategy there, bub.

[Merlin]

148. That's complete horseshit and you know it.

Are you telling me NYC would vote Bush except for our support of abortion on demand? That's nuts and you know it.

[Name removed]

153. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[salin]

156. just what was the effect of the green guy staying in the schwartz... race

again? Just what was the effect of a weak third party candidate on say... the 2000 election?

Ya... enough get peeled away out of complete frustration of being compromised out of TOO many vital issues (and no longer trusting that dems stand for the remaining issues they claim as core)... and yes - the potential to lose the coasts is real.

[salin]

150. "Papes?"

lost me with this term.

And you won't win this farm belt state... lost consistently before RvW.

[Walt Starr]

155. Yup and they'll still go Repuke after the Dems dump choice

Only thing that will happen is New York and California will either go Green or end up in the Puke column too because millions won't vote for a Democratic Party that abandons choice.

[lastliberalintexas]

166. Therein lies the biggest problem with this

Even if we were to abandon our principles, we wouldn't even get those voters (back?)! Those people think Dems are the Devil incarnate, and wouldn't vote for us even if we changed our platform to anti-choice.

[Scout]

208. NO, it wouldn't necessarily remain legal in all the blue states....

Michigan is a very anti-choice state, considering that it is blue. Don't assume that all blue states would keep abortion legal if Roe were overturned. They've already been chipping away for years...

[Bush was AWOL]

185. A core value?

Abortion is not something to be proud of or value in my opinion.

[Walt Starr]

190. The Freedom of Choice IS A CORE VALUE OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

Abandon it and the party WILL DIE!

[Scout]

209. too fucking bad. n/t

[Bush was AWOL]

211. What do you mean by that?

I've been down the road and am not proud, but still support abortion being legal. I do, however, think there should be some restrictions placed on how far into a pregnancy an abortion can take place w/ the exception of instances of rape and health of the mother.

[salin]

93. Were the party to abandon key issues as advocated here

and elsewhere on the forum... have to admit that for the first time this life-long dem would be looking elsewhere to vote. Wouldn't be able to trust that on any economic issues or social/net issues that the democratic party would still for equity and equality for all... I mean - if they completely abandon citizens and consumers and pander to corporations - then they will have enough money to win elections... (or whatever next warped logic is used to demonstrate NO allegiance to any principles.)

How many reading this post - would still trust the democratic party - if they abandoned Roe, dropped all gun control issues, and backed away from gay rights issues ... how many would trust that the democratic party would still fight for saving social security in a way that really saved it.. or that the democratic party would still believe in product safety/regulation and legal recourse through courts... or that the democratic party would push for raising the minimum raise... or any other issue?

[Walt Starr]

97. I wouldn't abandon the Democratic Party if it abandons choice

The Democratic Party would be abandoning me.

Choice is a non-negotiable issue for me. Dump it and they dump me, which is fine, there are plenty of other parties out there. The "you'd throw your vote away" bullshit would no longer hold any water.

[donheld]

96. No no no no no no no no

It's not about abortion it's about the right to choose. If progressives are not willing to stand up for the right to chose what to do with ones own body then we should all just shut the fuck up!

[MrSandman]

141. Wrong response...

Limiting choice is never a good thing. How can it even be proposed that we sacrifice a legitimate Constitutional Right to win an election? I know, the ConUS does not mention the right to abortion, but the Roe v. Wade decision and the doctrine of stare decisis pretty well guaratees that reproductive choice will be a Constitutional right for some time.

It is not like we are talking about Dred Scott.

[lastliberalintexas]

157. You don't get those voters back

I keep seeing posts talking about giving up X plank of the platform in order to get certain voters back to the Dem party. That line of thinking simply won't work with the fundie nutcases who vote based on abortion and gay rights. You won't get those people to vote Dem for another generation, because they have been brainwashed over the last 20 years to think of Dems as evil- pure, unadulterated evil agents of Satan. Logis has not place in their thought process, so this strategy just wouldn't work with them.


How many fundies do you actually know Merlin? I don't mean to sound insulting, so please don't take my question as such. But you really don't seem to understand those folks at all. By and large, they are NUTS!- illogical, irrational, unthinking, and intellectually dishonest/lazy. They don't question anything when their church/preacher/whatever tells them to do or how to vote.

You don't get any of those voters by intentionally and consciously abandoning support for the right to choose. You just lose quite a few voters like me instead.

[the_outsider]

159. Right to choose is non-negotiable for me (long)

I will vote third-party if the democratic party does not stand for it and there will be others.

What makes you think that 53% white woman that voted for * voted just on the pro-life issue? What about 75% non-white women who voted for Kerry? Using similar logic, can we conclude that they also just voted on the pro-choice issue and we don't need to listen to them just because they are minority women? And why we do we conclude that the white women are voting just on the "abortion issue" ? To my knowledge, no national poll ever showed that a majority of Americans supported overturning Roe/Wade. Republicans are politically too smart to go for it.

Now let's look at some numbers.

If you look at the exit poll demographics, the first thing that jumps out is the correlation of the income level and Bush votes.

                  *  Kerry
                  ---------
Under $15,000  36%  63%
$15-30,000     42%  57%
$30-50,000     49%  50%
$50-75,000      56%  43%
$75-100,000    55%  45%
$100-150,000    57%  42%
$150-200,000    58%  42%
>= $200,000      63%  35%

Who make up most of the high income brackets and who are promised the goodies by *? Whites. So why can't we conclude that 53% white women are voting in their own economic interest and in favor of keeping the status quo in wealth division and societal structures? That sounds more plausible to me than the fact that they are voting just on "abortion issue".

Also you completely ignored the impact of "war on terror" and the scare tactics on voters and especially women voters. That could explain the slight gains * made among women voters in 2004. Despite those small gains, 75% non-white women and 45% of white women voted for Kerry as opposed to 38% of white men. As always, they campaign and win primarily on greed and secondarily on fear.

Now what about 40% of the population who do not vote? How many of them are in low-income brackets who vote democrats? How come only 23% of voters reported an income level of 30K or less? Maybe the non-voters are overwhelmingly poor but do not see anything in our platform that can change their situation. Have you researched them with the same zeal that you are forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies to full term or to expose them to the risk of back-alley abortions? The rich white women do not care about the morality of "abortion issue". They can buy a safe abortion whenever and wherever they want to.

Maybe the right strategy is to find an economic message that resonates with the non-voters. Without discussing alternatives at all, how do you arrive at a sweeping conclusion like - "With abortion to defend, we cannot win" ?

[pinto]

165. "Safe, legal and rare": With all due respect to the range of opinion,

I think that standard could be a workable solution. It requires realistic, real world, real time, unplanned pregancy prevention, for young men and women and a de-escalation of the debate in favor of a focus on those involved. Thanks.

[readmoreoften]

167. Are you kidding? The majority of Americans WANT CHOICE!

We didn't 'lose in the only poll that mattered' on this one, it just wasn't people's top issue. The wedge that was used was GAYS.

THIS THREAD IS A WASTE OF TIME. WE'RE ON THE WINNING SIDE ON THIS ISSUE.

[buckettgirl]

170. I think what you say makes sense

But then at the same time I think that Roe v. Wade is legitimate in saying that abortion is a woman's right to choose.
The question isn't whether the fetus is human life (because it is). Fetus is the term used after 2nd trimester (I believe, I could be wrong.) The question is whether a blastocyst or embryo is human life. Scientifically, no. At the stage of a blastocyst, it has the potential to become human life - but it also has the potential to become a monkey. It doesn't because the genetic code eventually differientes cells into human cells and turns off coding designated for other mammals.
I think that if people weren't brainwashed into thinking that abortion is something that it is not, it would be a non-issue.
Roe v. Wade made first trimester abortions legal, second-trimester abortions legal only for health/genetic reasons, and third-trimester abortions legal only in a life threatening situation. This actually follows Aristole's theory of the human soul. These anti-abortion fanatics actually think that many women go have second and third trimester abortions because they want to. That just isn't so, because it isn't legal.
These so called articulate people aren't well read on the law and statistics. They seem to believe whatever is thrown at them. Articulate and intelligent people should know better than the be one issue voters. I have no respect for people like that. Save the potential human (American) babies, but kill adults and devestate lives in other countries....
You can't be pro-life and pro-war.

[Yuugal]

171. Blah nt

[Warren DeMontague]

174. I think you are deeply, fundamentally wrong here. (long)

On several different levels. It's obvious you're philosophically opposed to abortion, and that's certainly your right. However, abandoning Roe v. Wade will not be like "ditching a lead anchor", it would be a horrible mistake and probably the last nail in the coffin of a Democratic party that has consistently wimped out and sold it's principles off at the altar of supposed "electability".

First off, on abortion itself: You toss around the slavery metaphors like a true member of Operation Rescue. All you left out was the obligatory reference to the Dredd Scott decision. You briefly acknowledge that a "woman's own body" is also involved, but that right there is the big difference between a woman with a post conception fetus and a "slave owner"... A fetus is not a slave working in a cotton field, it is in a position wholly unlike anyone else in our society in that it is wholly dependent upon the physical being of another for it's survival. See, if your cousin needed a liver transplant, and you were the only person who could be a donor, would you be obligated to provide it to him? No? Why not? He's got a "right to life", yes? But not to your body. If a fetus has a "right to life", does it also- from the moment of conception- have more of a right to a woman's body than the woman, herself, does? By allowing the right to criminalize abortion, however "morally indefensible" you may think it is, what we are saying is that the government should be able to have more control over women's bodies than they should themselves. That they should be able to force women, against their will, to remain pregnant. That the most personal decision of all should be made by anonymous, impersonal forces.

You say that "the pro-lifers have won the PR war" about abortion. You are wrong. The majority of Americans are firmly pro-choice. The right-wing talking heads went out of their way before this election (the one you call the "recent poll" on the matter) to say that because of terrorism, etc. (not to mention gay marriage) abortion was "irrelevant". They say this because they know they are in the minority on the issue. The GOP makes sure to float a few big name pro-choicers at each convention because they understand where the public sits on this matter. They may be uncomfortable with abortion, but they certainly don't want the government making that decision instead of individual women.

You say that "obviously rape would be an exception", but have you really thought through the logistics on this, or on other end-result realities once televangelists start writing abortion laws? Go to most pro-life websites, and there, (right next to where they state that criminalizing the birth control pill is part and parcel of their agenda) they will talk about how "rape is no excuse" and "how are we going to stop women from lying that they were raped?"... How, indeed. I suspect the plan is to go back to the days where pregnant women were forced to stand in front of long card tables full of strange men, and explain why, precisely, they were attempting to get an abortion.

The GOP is in deep shit on abortion, and all we really need to do is wait. The worst thing we could do is abandon our core principles, even if that's what a significant portion of the nabob contingent here keeps exhorting us to do. See, they have reached "put up or shut up" time with regards to abortion. The pro-life religious right contingent feels that it's payback time. Yet the groups who comprise a big portion of the intellectual and financial base of the GOP are fiscally conservative vaguely libertarian types, who just hate paying taxes.. and they think Bush is stringing the googly-eyed religious crowd along. I suspect the GOP is very close to implosion over this, and I, for one, am prepared to sit back and enjoy the show. And in case you hadn't noticed, we're the minority party right now. Sitting back and watching is about all we can do.

Rather than doing what you propose, I say we reframe the debate. Call the religious right on their commitment to "life". They support a war based on lies and misinformation, don't they? They oppose policies that would make it easier for poor people in our society, don't they? I think anyone who says they oppose surgical abortion should be asked what precisely- aside from trying to make it illegal- they have done to reduce its incidence. How about supporting research into safer, more effective birth control? How about making the pill, and even the morning after pill available OTC? Comprehensive sex ed as opposed to "abstinence only"? A liveable minimum wage? A Single Payer Health Care System, because what is 45 million americans -ex fetuses, all- with no health insurance, if not a moral travesty?

What I'm not prepared to do is abandon my commitment to choice. Neither, I'm sure, are the 1.2 million other people, who like me, came out to DC to march for choice last april in the largest march the mall has ever seen.

[Mabel Dodge]

179. Don't even think about it.....

As one more female voice added to this nonsense. Don't even think about taking the right to choose away from the party platform. I have voted a straight Democratic Party ticket all my life, because this party is pro-choice.

It is the biggest issue for me and has been, since I came of age in the mid 70's. I know many women who feel the same way who are gay, celibate, or past child bearing years. This issue is not only about reproduction rights, it is also a symbol of freedom for women in this society.

Why don't you go tell African American Democrats that you want to bring back slavery for the sake of party unity, that’s just as ridiculous as abandoning pro-choice.

[Bridget Burke]

183. What other "positions" do you want to discard?

Give us a list, please.

[supernova]

186. Over my fucking dead body!

wil the Democratic party give up a woman's right to choose, the right to control her own body. :grr: That's the day I won't consider myself a Democrat anymore.

Wow! You wasted an incredible amount of bandwith to be wrong.

We've only been at this for 30 years. That's not a long time for a social change to sink in. We've done a lot in these years, to be sure. And I think that's part of the backlash. Some things, like the role of women, are happening a little too fast for some in our society to deal with it. The freedom to choose pregnancy and birth control are the central part of that change in the roles of women.

And how glad I am of it. Honestly, If I had to to grow up knowing that the outcome of my life would depend upon how well I married and how many children I had to have, I think I would have opted for a nunnery.

But we do them a disservice to pander to their belief that the world would be a lot better if we just went back to the way things were. We need to help them along, not give in.

[high density]

187. Sorry, you lost me after the second sentence and I stopped reading.

Even if the Democrats did drop abortion, the right-wing still has gays, guns, and God to use as wedge issues. If those evaporate then they'll generate new ones like mandatory seatbelt laws or something asinine like that.

Conceding some of our values (FYI, we are the party of pro-choice people) is not the way to move on from here. Are we going to ban all of the gays from the party? How about all of the atheists?

This election was won on FEAR: Fear of gays getting married and fear of terrorism.

[Threedifferentones]

188. You're exactly right.

Unfortunately I believe that the right to an abortion is a fundamental right as strongly as they believe it is fundamentaly evil. I will NEVER give this up, because doing so would make me a Republican.


3DO

[Geek_Girl]

191. Republicans will not Over Turn Roe V. Wade

Because it will devastate them politically. It will kill them in State Elections and then they will not have a platform to rally there base though, I'm sure they'll come up with a wedge issue even more vile. I have a feeling it's going to by gay rights not just the marriage issue.

This is what Democrats need to do. If the partial ban abortion law gets overturned because it's unconstitutional, purpose a ban that takes into account the womans health and make it part of the party platform run on it and turn around a point a finger at the incompetence of Republican party for not being able to support and pass simple legislation that respects life, both the mother and the child. It may seem like caving, but democrats can turn this one around. Most Americans support womans choice and most Americans support a ban on partial birh abortions.

As far as gay marriage it needs to remain a state issue. Democrats need to package it up with other legislation that give the states more rights and sell it the American people as not letting big brother decide their fate.

[DrWeird]

194. Some people call them babies.

I don't see why one's more accurate than the other.

[skygazer]

195. Always so easy for men to throw this issue out the window

What comes next? We decide to throw gays and lesbians out of the boat because they're weighing it down? Minorities? Freedom of speech? Fuck you, I'm not simply going to toss out my principles because you seem to think abortion lost this election. How absurd.

The problem is framing and articulating the positions we hold. Not abandoning them because others may not agree with them.

[thinkingwoman]

196. having had an abortion at 19

and then two miscarriages and two beautiful children conceived while using various methods of "birth control" (not in that order), I agree with you.

That's right. I said I agree with you. I have been a political junkie all my life and this is a lose-lose issue for Dems.

Dems need to give it up. Period. If women want to control their own destinies, let us fight for that right ourselves.

I am sickened and disgusted by the lack of concern that this younger generation has for reproductive rights and equal pay, and countless other feminist ideals. They don't appreciate the work that was done by my mother's generation, or the disappointment I feel as I send my almost grown daughter out into a world that looks the same or worse than the one I came of age in.

I'm also sickened by women like my mother-in-law who pooh-pooh the notion that Roe could be overturned.

I say, let them face their own consequences and learn from them.

Meanwhile, the Dems need to win my such large margins that elections can't be stolen anymore.

[greatauntoftriplets]

198. You must be male....

And, no, I have never had an abortion.

But if men could get pregnant, abortions would be readily availab.e

[Endangered Specie]

200. Don't listen... not ALL of us men are like that.

As a (Southern White Hetero) Male I'm proud to say that I FULLY support a woman's right to choose, and when confronted about it I defend it as hard as any other progressive value I hold.

Im not about to give up on such a major accomplishment and Ill be damned if the Democrats or us liberals ever give this up. Cause I don't call them "pro-life" I call them "pro-eugenics".

Now Merlin, put that in your pipe and smoke it.

[greatauntoftriplets]

218. I know.....

My guy is a Southern white hetero...and fully supports a woman's right to choose.

:hi:

[Amaya]

201. If MEN got pregnant....

freedom of choice would be engraved in the Bill of Rights.

[AwakeAtLast]

202. Agree to the fullest extent!

And birth control pills would be showered like candy (like Viagra) and covered by insurance.

[ScreamingMeemie]

204. Merlin, you've expounded your backwards, women hating ideas adnauseum here

Why you find a need to start another thread on it is beyond me. Please go back to your pew now. Thanks.

[bloom]

212. "With abortion to defend, we cannot win. Without it, we cannot lose."

I disagree completely. There is nothing to back that up.

Maybe you haven't read this yet.

http://www.wwcd.org/issues/Lakoff.html

I think it explains why anti-choice is a part of the whole Republican shebang.

And consequently why it fits in with the totality of the opposing view.

[jdots]

215. Merlin are you a male ?

if so butt out and let women decide.

[Moderator]

219. I'm locking this thread

reason :

Flamewar full of personal attacks