I'd get behind an anti-abortion Democratic president.

[Peak_Oil]

Bottom line, we're going to lose much more important rights than the right to safe and legal abortions if Bush wins. I think it would be sad, and I know a lot of women would die if abortion was made illegal again.

However.

If we give up on that particular right, then the Fundies wouldn't have that particular single-issue vote necessarily going toward Republicans. They'd lose time after time after time.

We have much more serious environmental issues out there to deal with. We're losing our forests. We've already lost clean air, clean water, public hunting and fishing areas, the 4th amendment, actually the entire bill of rights, free elections...

We could lose our whole democracy if GWB gets to appoint a couple Supreme Court Justices.

We've most certainly lost freedom of speech and the right to assemble. We could easily blow the possiblity of a separation of church and state. We can be arrested and held as enemy combatants with no evidence, trials, etc.

This is quickly becoming 1984.

Give it up on abortion, and we're back in the catbird's seat.

This is not meant to start a flame war. Seriously, weigh the issue for yourselves. Is that one right worth losing all the rest? Is it really?

Imagine having excellent public sex education and condom distribution services that will help prevent pregnancy rather than require abortion. In cases of rape or incest or something of that nature there will be doctors that will do what they have to do. There will always be doctors who will do what they have to do. We could have RU486 bootlegged in from Canada or something.

Weigh that one issue against all the other neocon smokescreens.

[freetobegay]

1. I say no!

ON EDIT: Sorry I have to throw this in. There are rights right now that I don't even have & there have been several people right here on this board to tell Gay & lesbieans it's not time yet or this issue will doom us in the general election (I remember this all to clearly in the primaries!). NEVER NEVER GIVE UP A RIGHT, YOU MAY NEVER GET IT BACK! To do this to women would be insane. There, I feel beeter now.

[IdaBriggs]

2. Yes, that right is worth DYING for!!!

At least for 50% of the population. Cervical pregnancy = death of mother and child. Tubal pregnancy = death of mother and child.

Bad things happen sometimes, and if the answer is "oh well, die anyway, because our religion says God wants you to go to heaven" my answer, is NO.

I have edited out all my flame at you. Trust me; it was not easy. Then again, ITS MY LIFE you are talking about since I'm a woman of childbearing age.

[LoZoccolo]

10. Abortion was never illegal for health reasons.

I would agree that I wouldn't even want to require doctors to have to prove it was for health reasons, but it was never illegal when the life of the mother was in danger, not even in Texas where Roe vs. Wade originally challenged the laws.

[IdaBriggs]

27. Unfortunately, that is NOT the understanding of everyone nowadays.

A "good Catholic" friend of mine was recently explaining TO HIS WIFE that abortion in the event of a cervical or tubal pregnancy is not a requirement. His wife hit him upside the head with a reality brick, but he's skeptical. He's not alone in his belief, and I'm not going along with it. End of discussion for me.

[fugue]

30. It was never illegal for *life of the mother* reasons

It was denied for mere health reasons. My mother wanted an abortion because the fetus was lying on her left sciatic nerve, doing permanent nerve damage to her left leg and lower back. The pregnancy did not, however, threaten her life and so she was denied an abortion. She had shooting pains and paralysis ever afterward. She couldn't move her left toes at all and usually couldn't feel her left foot.

[truthpusher]

3. It would be anti-american...

I appreciate your thoughtfulness. However it would be anti-American to put religion before freedom. Our rights are valueless without the drive to keep and obtain them.

[noamnety]

4. I'm not selling my body for a vote.

Sorry, I'm not interested in whoring out my uterus to anyone, under any circumstances.

[Morning Dew]

5. Do you really think that would make a difference?

Adopting part of the agenda will only embolden them. There will be a new divisive issue - Gays, religion, whatever. Nope, they need to be rooted out and driven back into their little fearmongering closets.

[XanaDUer]

6. And,

we need to drop civil right issues. That is too polarizing as well. While we're at it, let's drop gay rights.

And the environment. If we only do this, then we will be voted into office by moderates.

:eyes:


Never appease conservatives.

[michaelzef]

23. and.

progressive taxes, socialized medicine, redistribution of wealth, prisoner rights, women in combat, animal rights and religious persecution- ie;(prayer in school)

No we need to stick together

[cheezus]

7. I'm an anti-abortion, pro-choice democrat

why take away choice when there are far more effective methods of actually reducing the number of abortions?

[K8-EEE]

8. WRONG! MOST Americans Want Abortion LEGAL

Which is why GWB will not say out loud that he wants to criminalize it.

If we could get him to say he does not believe that abortion should be legal in this country, we win.

[aquart]

9. Stupidest, most gutless strategy I've ever heard.

And I've been here a while.

Buy a clue: Women want the right to do whatever they please with their own bodies. There are more women than men.

You are proposing that the Democratic Party abandon women's rights in order to gain..........what?

Very nice, literate try at divisive disinformation. We're getting a lot of that today. Desperation at the RNC?

[Peak_Oil]

20. I disagree.

First, I disagree that women want the right to do whatever they please with their own bodies. GWB will command very close to 50% of the popular vote. Unless it is your position that each and every single one of those votes is going to be cast by a man, they you know just as well as I do that large numbers of women will vote for the man they think will try to make abortion illegal.

Shoot a hole in that.

Next. I am proposing that the D's abandon women's right to abortion in order to gain:

1. Responsible financing of government activities. We are BANKRUPT and it's going to come home to roost soon. I like being able to use public infrastructure, such as water systems, roads, police, schools, and fire departments. We are in SERIOUS DANGER of losing these things. Our public school system is in RUINS. I know this, I constantly go to grade schools, high schools, and colleges for work. Teachers, you know this is true.

2. Protection of the environment. Every day we waste in forcing our corporations to be responsible for their own waste is another day that we're robbing from our grandchildren. We're turning this country into a toxic waste dump. Or water is being poisoned. We have more cancer in this country due to toxicity in the environment than we even know. This protects women as well as men. We ruin the physical environment, and we ALL go down.

3. Rights to freedom of speech, assembly, to unionize (ha!), etc etc etc.

In exchange for those things, I'd vote for an anti-abortion Democratic president who upheld the other things. Take away the RNC's fundie base, and it's all over! We'll get some progress!

This is again not meant to be a flame war, but for actual discussion of the facts. I'm willing to break ranks with the majority here to initiate actual discussion rather than simply parroting the party line.

[smirkymonkey]

31. Fortunately, it's not YOUR decision to make.

You are asking for a flame war and you know it, despite your ridiculous insistance that you wish to "initiate actual discussion".

A pro-choice opinion does not preclude the achievement of your other goals. Your argument is disingenuous and pointless.

[saracat]

40. You are sick.

[Q]

11. What 'right' would you want to give up next...

...in order to 'win'?

[seabeyond]

12. are you a female, cause if you aren't

awfully easy to give up a right that doesn't effect you at all. it would go beyond. we are talking allowing them to have the power to dictate whatever they deem unsafe for fetus. smoke, drink coffee, too much sugar, no seatbelt. gonna put women in jail for these infractions.

no thank you. women have lived under male tyranncy long enough. i don't want a step back wards as hard as the bible thumping white male wants to rule me

screw that shit

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. A Person Who Gives Up A Little Freedom For A Little Security

Ends Up With Neither...



I had a brain lapse...

Was that Churchill , Thomas Jefferson, or Ben Franklin?

[fugue]

17. Franklin

[Out the Parasites]

19. Ben Franklin

[The Wielding Truth]

36. It was Democratic America shouting . Vote out Bush!

[fugue]

14. I am weighing it

It's my body we're talking about. (Let me go out on a limb and guess that you're male and that's why this is such a nonissue for you.)

No, I will never give my consent to let someone else control it.

Clearly you've got money and could arrange an abortion if you (if my assumption is wrong) or someone in your family needed needed one. Illegal procedures and drugs are expensive as well as unsafe, and not accessible to everyone, even assuming the buyer actually gets the real deal for their money.

The right to terminate a pregnancy is just as profound as free speech, habeus corpus, trial by jury, freedom of assembly, etc. It's basic control over one's body.

If the Democrats went pro-life, they'd lose my vote. I would sit out elections or vote for third parties who supported choice. Why support a party that makes it clear they will sacrifice my control over my own body for political expediency?

[mongo]

24. I wish Kerry had made that point in the debates

That women had abortions before Roe Vs Wade, in backalleys with coathangers.

Making it illegal will just put women in danger.

[cally]

15. How dare you

give up my rights to health care and my own body for your so called more important issues. Don't ever, ever, ask me to support something that is necessary to your life because I won't do it. If we forget women't rights you may have given up on a Democrat ever winning. Stupidest post ever.

[shraby]

22. That idea is tantamount to

saying to an abused spouse...you were only beaten once, it will not happen again.

[Out the Parasites]

16. ummm...lemme think for a minute...NO FING WAY!!!!!

Yeah, that's pretty much all I got to say about that. I had more, but not worth the time. This was probably not your greatest contribution, so I'll ignore it.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

18. I know a bad joke when I hear one.

[w4rma]

21. You can be anti-abortion and pro-choice (nt)

[69KV]

25. The abortion issue...

The abortion issue can be broken down this way:

1. Abortions happen, and they are legal and safe.

2. Abortions happen, and they are illegal, back-alley or coat hanger abortions that endanger the mother's life.

Those are the only two possibilities.

The pro-life movement wants to pretend that there is a third possibility, "abortions won't happen if they are illegal." They have their heads off in the clouds if they think abortion will just go away if it is illegal.

Abortions will happen, legal or not. The question is, since they are going to happen will they be safe or unsafe for the mother? That is the real issue. Any thinking "pro-lifer" will understand that given the choice between an abortion which endangers the life of the mother and an abortion which does not endanger the life of the mother, they'll choose keeping abortion legal.

The same thing goes, by the way, for drugs and alcohol. People are going to use them regardless. Legal and regulated, or illegal, unpure, and dangerous?

[fugue]

34. You're definitely right!

I was talking with a woman in her late seventies. Her mother wanted an abortion (of her), and her father was willing to pay for it. Everything was scheduled, with an actual ob-gyn, and then it occurred to her father that he might have a son and called it off, over her mother's protests. "Serves him right!" she crowed.

In her twenties, she had a friend who got an abortion at her ob-gyn's office. She had to pay for it under the table, of course, but she got one.

This is back in the 1930s and '50s, decades before Roe v. Wade.

If abortion is made illegal, the rich will still get safe ones. It's the rest of us who will end up with the coat hangers.

[Virginian]

26. To Fundies: Life does not end at birth.

There are more than 9 months to a life.

[spanone]

28. Not Me. Remember Roe V. Wade?????

When I was a kid in the fifties women were dying from back-alley abortions. Meanwhile the rich were allowed to have them performed as outpatient services. It's a medical decision NOT a political decision.

[ant]

29. you assume abortion is a stand alone issue

I object on principle to the idea that trees are more important than women's health. Outlawing abortion won't just ban a procedure, it'll have serious consequences for ALL women of reproductive age, whether they need/want abortions or not.

But setting that aside for a moment: If you give in on abortion you're also giving in on reason-based sex ed and available birth control. Personal beliefs on abortion are part of an entire belief system - you can't just get someone who's fabulously progressive and just happens to be conservative on this one issue. There may be the rare case out there, but if someone is seriously that reasonable then there can be compromise. The only people you'd be reaching with such a proposal are people who would demand many other things.

Abortion and its associated issues (see, for example, contraception) are nothing but a cover for people who believe women's sexual freedom is a threat to The Way Things Should Be. I mean, is it just a coincidence that religious/personal beliefs concerning the beginning of life only seem to pop up when we're talking about women NOT having children? When was the last time a pharmacist denied a woman her fertility drugs because it would lead to unused embryos that would one day be destroyed?

So go ahead, hand over the women if you want. Then you can cave on the gays, and maybe next you'll be arguing that we should reconsider the whole the civil rights thing too. But hey, at least you'll have clean water to drink.

[Peak_Oil]

33. I know. This is so bad.

I know a lot of single-issue voters out there who are focussed (focused?) on gun control and abortion. If there was any way to appease them and simultaneously get responsible on the other important issues, then we'd be able to make progress.

As far as the But hey, at least you'll have clean water to drink line, maybe you should take another look at how flip you are on that subject. When people don't have clean drinking water, they die. All of them. Men and women alike, but mostly children.

China is dealing with a horrible water pollution problem right now because of the factories that make MSG. There is a silent genocide happening down the river from the largest MSG factory in China. People die of cancer so fast there that the area is becoming not only depopulated but uninhabitable by any form of life. Crops die, people die, animals move on to greener pastures. It'll be a desert sooner or later. That's where we're headed.

Unless we find some way to common ground with those who oppose us, we will not come to a solution. We will remain divided. There has to be a way to get together on issues and come up with a workable solution! We have to FIND A WAY. Unless we're willing to really divide and split this country physically in two between those who hold to the Republican agenda and the Democratic agenda, we're going to have to find a way to get along without killing each other in the process.

[saracat]

42. I would rather split the country.

And it might come to that. If we agreed with you, there would be no point to the Democratic Party. We would be moderate Repugs!

[DaveSZ]

37. All you pro-choicers

support gun rights and ending the "drug war" too right?

It comes down to one basic premise: freedom

[69KV]

39. Short answer

Yes, on all three issues. Making something illegal doesn't make it go away, just drives it underground and makes it unregulated and far more dangerous.

[ant]

57. well, I can't speak for ALL pro-choicers

But I can tell you that for me, YES, I do support gun rights and ending the drug war.

However, I disagree that it comes down the basic premise of freedom. I mean, I believe freedom is an important aspect here, but more generally I think it comes down to the premise that you can't solve social problems by outlawing their symptoms. Abortion, guns, and drugs aren't our problems. These are all symptoms of larger social issues involving poverty, lack of education, crime, etc. Banning the symptoms isn't going to address those issues.

[IndianaGreen]

32. I won't support any candidate that is against gay rights, abortion rights,

I won't support any candidate that is against gay rights, abortion rights, or supports the US occupation of Iraq, or Israel's settlements in the Occupied Territories.

I won't support those that won't support my issues, so if you are a prochoice person but you don't support the rights of gay people to full equality, including same sex marriage, I won't get my support on "your" issue.

[Warpy]

35. If you were a woman subject to the slavery of enforced childbirth

I think you'd find that one issue a lot more important. If you were faced with forced to lay your life on the line as somebody else's baby machine, you'd find yourself taking this issue just a little more seriously.

It's only an unimportant issue to that half of the population that is anatomically exempt from ever having to consider it as anything but an abstract.

You'd better listen to the half of the population that is facing being thrust back into slavery. If you don't, you will lose us.

[saracat]

38. My Personhood is at stake.

Personhood is the only right that counts. I I don't exist as a person, what the hell do I care what kind of enviornment there is? How can I respect the enviornment if I don't respect myself? Pro Choice is not a negotiatable plank in my platform. Why would you bring this up when we have a pro choice candidate for president?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

41. Of course you would, you are male

[Amaya]

43. EXACTLY

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

44. Is it right wing talking points day at DU?

:wtf: :hi:

[Amaya]

50. Just got on

what else have I missed? :)

[SammyWinstonJack]

58. I can't remember which DUer said this but it was a male and

it was a very good statement. "If men were able to become pregnant, there would be an abortion clinic next to every Jiffy Lube in this Country." Wonder what men would say if the Gov. wanted to exercise control over their bodies?

[unfrigginreal]

45. The most ignorant post that I've ever seen on DU

and I should know, I've posted plenty.

[Tansy_Gold]

46. Excuse me, but what "right" is "more important" than

the right to have control over one's own body?

I've known women who were in their 50s, thought they were beyond child-bearing, only to turn up pregnant. By the time they discovered it, they also learned there were major problems with the fetuses. You would deny them the right to abort? You would saddle them, against their will, and their about-to-retire husbands, with the enormous financial, emotional, and physical costs of raising a child with severe handicaps?

I've known young girls, some barely in their teens, who were impregnated by their uncles, step-brothers, step-fathers, mothers' boyfriends, etc. You'd deny them, too?

Oh, I'm sure you'll insist on the "rape or incest or the life of the mother." You don't care about her mental state, or the life the child might be born into, or anything else. LIFE IS SO FUCKING SACRED BEFORE IT'S BORN, BUT FUCK IT AFTERWARD.

No, I will never turn my back on the fight to keep abortion safe and legal and AVAILABLE.

The anti-choicers are ANTI-WOMAN, and as far as I'm concerned, anyone -- ANYONE -- who is anti-choice is similarly anti-woman. i don't care if you're on DU and a staunch Kerry/Edwards supporter. IMHO, anyone who denies a woman the right to determine her reproductive future is denying that woman the right to self fulfillment.

Tansy Gold

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

47. hear hear

:thumbsup:

[Oak2004]

48. I'm not so sure it would do a thing to undercut the fundies

They are not one-issue voters. They also stand for no birth control, no stem cell research, imposing their religion upon education, imposing their religion upon the sciences, imposing their religious views upon international policy, etc.

And if you think these issues aren't just as fervent a rallying point for them, attend a school board meeting almost anywhere in America.

If I was forced to choose between an anti-choice fascist and an anti-choice otherwise-liberal candidate, I'd of course pick a liberal. But I'd hold my nose while I did it, and be on the streets the day after the election with my fellow pro-choice supporters. Not that I'd expect we'd be protesting against the liberal winner: too many people like me would have been unable to force themselves to vote at all, and the fascist would, most likely, have waltzed in.

[Amaya]

49. Your argument is weak and dangerous

And personally I don't give two shits what "The Fundies" have or want.

Fuck them.

[Darranar]

51. Most Americans SUPPORT abortion rights. Giving it up would...

accomplish nothing, but it would result in the loss of an essential civil right.

Giving up a woman's ability to control her own body is not at all "worth it".

[Out the Parasites]

52. I'd get behind the anti-abortion, if anti-abortion peeps behind it gave up

there reproductive rights and either had vasectomy and tubal ligation

[bloom]

53. Let's just give up all of our rights....

We could be like Romania -

Posted by Marianne recently:

"It was tried in Romania by Nicolae Ceausescu. All women were required to be examined every three months to determine their reproductive state--pregnant or not. If they were caught aborting, they were arrested or punished. Soon the state orphanages were overflowing with babies. "

___________________________________

Who needs privacy, anyway...

To balance it out - we'll take away men's right to determine their sexual preferences - we'll just have a lottery process. That will cut down on how many children are born - since if abortions are eliminated - there will be too many children. So half the population will be forced to be gay (or at least celibate) whether they like it or not. We'll have the police patrolling the bedrooms of the country to make sure everyone complies... maybe we could insert chips in everybody that can monitor the situation.


We could create a really fucked up society if we put our minds to it - for those of you who don't think it's bad enough, yet.


:eyes:

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

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

[LoZoccolo]

55. I think I'm the only person that gets this.

I think it's approached with the assumption:

Republicans win: abortion is banned along with rights A, B, C, and D plus another war.

Democrats win: abortion is banned

Yes, I would vote for the Democrat then. And the rest of you for whom I rescued rights A, B, C, and D and avoided getting drafted could kiss my ass for the next four years.

[sangh0]

59. You're really not getting it

It's two weeks before an election, and we all know who the masters of wedge issues are.

Kerry is winning, so suddenly today we see people willing to give up issues?

It's button pushing. Don't let them push your buttons.

[sangh0]

56. Disruptive wedge issues two weeks before an election

What a surprise!

[Moderator]

60. Locking.......

This is flamebait.



DU Moderator