Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is Miers anti-choice?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
converted_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:35 PM
Original message
Is Miers anti-choice?
Edited on Mon Oct-03-05 03:09 PM by converted_democrat
During Miers' tenure as head of the Texas Bar Association she was a leader in the campaign to reverse the American Bar Association's pro-choice position on the right to choose. Had this campaign been successful, which it was not, the ABA would have been returned to its former position of neutrality.


http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/files/portal/media/pressreleases/pr-051003-miers.xml


edit- To change pro-life to anti-choice. Sorry, I used the wrong terminology. After my daughter was born this has become a bigger and bigger issue with me. I'm still learning. Thank you for politely correcting me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
julialnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. she is anti-choice
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
butchcjg Donating Member (149 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. so is Reid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
julialnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. personally
but he hasn't tried to change it like she has
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
butchcjg Donating Member (149 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #3
19. His wikipedia entry
Says that he tried to convince Bush to put in anti-abortion GOP leaders to replace Sandra Day.

He has also voted along GOP party lines on most abortion bills (making it a crime to injure a fetus, banning abortions on military bases, banning 3rd term abortions, etc)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
converted_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. I was hoping that I was reading it wrong. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nvliberal Donating Member (618 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
16. Conjecture,
not fact.

Remember the christo-fascists being upset with her. They wouldn't if she were truly anti-abortion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
converted_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. She was a leader in a campaign to reverse the ABA pro-choice position.
How is that conjecture? And since when have the freepers been right about anything? Why would you base anything on anything "they" say?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ozarkvet Donating Member (185 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
5. Church
She is apparently deeply involved with a fundamentalist church.

I would be suprised if she was not anti-abortion rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DefenseLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:43 PM
Response to Original message
6. Playing devil's advocate,
perhaps literally, it might be argued that she pushed for a neutral position simply to keep pro-lifers and their money in the fold at the bar association rather than because she was a true believer on the issue. If she was head of the state bar association, if my experience is any guide, she was probably more concerned with memberships and money than with grassroots politics. Not a defense, since obviously I have no idea what her motivations were, just throwing out a theory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. But wouldn't that position do more harm than good?
Sure, we're talking about Texas. But we're also talking about lawyers, people who generally respect the law as it stands -- well, maybe respect is a poor choice of words, but you get the idea.

That idea being -- wouldn't embracing a pro-life stance as a member of the ABA do more harm than good?
On the other hand, her coalition in 1993 was filled with some heavy hitters, so it's not as though the vast majority of big-gun lawyers are pro-choice, which seems to be a commonly accepted myth.

P.S. Nice avatar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DefenseLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. My understanding,
and it is only from what I have been reading today, is that she didn't advocate embracing a pro-life stance so much as she called for abandoning their position supporting Roe, and returning to taking no position whatsoever on the issue. If that were the case, it could have been less ideological and more about not alienating wingnut members, or potential members, and their cash. Obviously if she was advocating that the ABA take a pro-life stance, that is a different thing all together and it would be difficult to propose a non-wingnut reason for.

P.S. Thanks HST RIP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. You're right...
It was an advocation of a return to neutrality, not calling for a 180-degree reversal of the ABA's stance on abortion. However, given the pro-lifers who sided with Meirs in the argument, the idea that this was based on a real desire to remain neutral in the argument is a little disingenuous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cloister Donating Member (25 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. The way I heard it
She thought that if the ABA was going to take an official stance on controversial/contentious issues like this, it should be put to a vote of the membership instead of being decided by the leadership.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
julialnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. Miers gave to a staunchly anti-abortion rights candidate
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nvliberal Donating Member (618 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. And she's given to Democrats.
The fact of the matter is, NOBODY knows where she stands on anything.

Which is why Bush picked her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
butchcjg Donating Member (149 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. al gore..
wasn't al gore anti-choice back when she gave?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VOX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
7. The "pro-life" handle is a right-wing lie. Please don't use it...
Liberals and progressives are far more "pro-life" than any so-called "compassionate" right wingers. (I no longer call them conservatives, as there is nothing conservative about those extremist radicals.) Liberals and progressives, however, **are** pro-choice, pro-women's rights, and pro-keep the hell out of my reproductive organs.

Please do not fall into the trap of using the right-wing "pro-life" handle, you just further cement a lie by doing so.

Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karlrschneider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Ding ding! You said it right. There are probably not 200 humans who
are not "pro-life."

Pro life and pro choice are NOT mutually exclusive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. Indeed. In this instance, the liberal wordsmithing is closer to the truth
Pro-choice vs. anti-choice is closer to the actual facts than pro-life vs. anti-life.

The latter doesn't even make any sense, but then again, when you're talking about religio-crazy Jesus freaks, what does?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calico1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
8. I prefer the term "anti-choice."
"pro-life" is a term used by the right to paint supporters of choice as pro-abortion in that they run around trying to talk people into having abortions that WANT to have their babies. Let's not use their term. You can be pro-life and pro-choice too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timber84 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
10. Off topic kinda is Cheney pro-choice?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beelzebud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
14. It doesn't matter to some people. This is a victory, remember?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
converted_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
22. The biggest thing that bothers me about this.....
She's anti-choice, Reid is anti-choice, I just have a bad feeling about this. I really hope Reid has a plan, but I have a bad feeling about this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Sleeper Donating Member (229 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-03-05 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
24.  She's pro choice alright...
whenever any choice comes up, she's pro Bush and "anti" everything else.
She's the BFEE ringer that takes care of any pesky issues that might come up...she's done LOTS of scrubbing for her boy....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 03:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC