Let Roe v Wade be overturned........

[Burma Jones]

I suggest that it is time to change the battle from a judicial battle to a legislative battle. Perhaps it is time that the Dems stopped fighting at a national level for social issues that ought to be argued at a state level. Sure, there will be states that absolutely restrict abortion. There will plenty of others that will not.

I believe that the cultural wars that are now ensuing will never be "won" by either side. The social conservatives are not going to run off to the coasts and tell everyone to accept their way of life. They do want local control though. We will never be able to change their minds about abortion, they will have to do that themselves. We will never be able to change their minds about same sex unions, that as well will have to happen organically.

Changing the reproductive rights battle from a judicial fight to a legislative fight will harm women in the ultra conservative states at first. However, I believe that, after over 30 years of access, and what we claim as a general level of support for reproductive rights, we will not revert to the America of the 1950's.

Here's a ranking of number of abortions by state in 2000, it's illuminating:
1 California 236,060
2 New York 129,678
3 Florida 88,563
4 Texas 76,121
5 Illinois 45,884
6 Ohio 38,140
7 Pennsylvania 35,630
8 New Jersey 33,026
9 Georgia 31,678
10 North Carolina 30,157
11 Virginia 27,999
12 Massachusetts 27,180
13 Michigan 26,807
14 Washington 25,692
15 Tennessee 17,479
16 Minnesota 14,468
17 Oregon 14,194
18 Alabama 13,553
19 Connecticut 12,908
20 Maryland 12,337
21 Indiana 12,272
22 Kansas 12,225
23 Louisiana 11,384
24 Wisconsin 11,040
25 Arizona 10,064
26 Missouri 7,884
27 South Carolina 7,527
28 Oklahoma 7,182
29 District of Columbia 6,659
30 Nevada 5,972
31 Iowa 5,747
32 Arkansas 5,501
33 New Mexico 5,465
34 Rhode Island 5,413
35 Delaware 5,082
36 Kentucky 4,630
37 Colorado 4,215
38 Nebraska 4,178
39 Hawaii 3,941
40 Mississippi 3,758
41 Utah 3,509
42 West Virginia 2,549
43 Maine 2,536
44 Montana 2,441
45 Vermont 1,781
46 North Dakota 1,341
47 South Dakota 878
48 Idaho 801
49 Wyoming 6

Here are sources:

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5212a1.htm
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/usa/ab-usa-ca.html

[Mr_Spock]

1. There is a definite advanage to reevaluating each divisive issue

and coming up with a better plan for winning national elections. Sometimes people aren't as happy "getting" as they are "wanting". Let them feel the sting of rejection when they do aweful things and nobody wants to live near them or associate with them.

[puddycat]

2. these numbers are not "illuminating" without further data

It means nothing to indicate the number of abortions without indicating the ratio of abortions to populations, adjusted for in-state abortions only. For example, most Wyomians who want an abortion would be forced to go to a state where its readily available, and so that would skew numbers. I'm not a statistical person, but this is all just common sense, isn't it?

[cheezus]

7. yeah, "per capita" would be better

[Burma Jones]

11. Sorry, was at work, I figured people could do the rough math

in their heads based on what they knew about the states.....

[msongs]

33. its about the relationship to female population per state compared to

the number of abortions, ie, the rate.

Msongs
dean obama 2008
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[Rush1184]

57. Thankyou, I was thinking the same thing...

Especially, when looking at the data it is roughly similar in order to state populations.

[nodehopper]

3. let it be overturned?

How nice to make such a blaze statement.

"Changing the reproductive rights battle from a judicial fight to a legislative fight will harm women in the ultra conservative states at first."

Have you asked these women if they are willing to bleed to death?

[DuaneBidoux]

40. Well the red states wanted to be red didn't they?

I'm thinking the blue states could have a massive fund set up for red state women to take the trips they need across state lines (hey, we could even turn it into a cruise).

[DuaneBidoux]

41. AND if these states really want to end abortion why not let them?

Abortion was NEVER nationally illegal. There wouldn't be a blue state that ever reinstated abortion prohibition. Maybe returning to that old idea of states rights is going to be the only thing we can do to save the union.

[kslib]

4. being a woman in a conservative state

I will continue the fight on the national level. I live in Kansas, where would the closest liberal state be if a woman here needed an abortion? 2 states, maybe 3 states away?

[choicevoice]

5. Lets just say No Fucking Way for no fucking reason

Period. No discussion.

[choicevoice]

6. I changed my mind.. lets discuss it.

Because you post a lot of numbers on that page it means what? It means that for every number on that page there is a story of a woman who faced a difficult decision. A decision that is none of your business, and none of the fucking fundies business.

Are you ready to FORCE WOMEN TO REPRODUCE AGAINST THEIR WILL? What are you going to do? Chain them to a bed in some pregnancy ward?

I could argue this for days I'll just leave you with this much.

[Burma Jones]

9. I just want this off the table, or have the GOP put up or shut up

Do you think that every Red state in the USA would quickly abolish abortion? I'm not so sure they all would and I'm not so sure it would happen quickly.

I put the numbers up to illustrate that there have been large numbers of abortions in Red states. Indeed, I agree with you that each number represents a person, with a family, with friends. But that also means that they know someone that actually did have an abortion and know their humanity and when push comes to shove, who knows what they'll do?

If indeed states abolish abortion, do you think it's feasable to help women from states where abortion is illegal get the procedure where it would be legal? There would be millions of dollars available for this sort of thing. If a woman is together enough to seek and obtain an abortion, especially in a state where there may already be almost no access to the procedure, I think she could avail herself for help to get the work done in a legal state, with supportive people around her.

We're on the same side you know.........

[smirkymonkey]

34. Your profile says you are male.

It's not your fucking decision.

[Burma Jones]

75. In this America, it most certainly is

and that's the problem. You have to change the definition of America. I believe you would far prefer males like me to have a larger say than males like Pat Robertson.

[FatSlob]

12. Force them to reproduce?

Not quite, they could abstain, get an IUD, use a condom, etc. Let's be more clear. Force them to bear the child of an unwanted pregnancy. In almost all cases, the "act" that leads to reproduction is not forced. I know, I'm being an asshole about semantics.

[choicevoice]

15. no you are just being an asshole

Contraception fails, and lets take a poll on how many husbands/boyfriends etc are willing to abstain. I personally got pregnant twice while taking birth control pills, seems they failed to let us know back then that antibiotics make the pill ineffective.

so you think that forcing a woman to gestate for 9 months and deliver a child is ok.....Ever had to do it under normal circumstances? Now how about if it is from a rape or incest. Current statistics show that 1 in 4 women in their lifetime will be molested or raped, and those are only the reported cases. Victims of rape have the option to take precautions at the hospital to prevent having through an unwanted pregnancy. Those procedures are gone along with RU-486.

What it boils down to is that should I choose to abort its a matter of privacy and no ones business.

I'm sorry if you want to parse words but in fact they would be FORCING A WOMAN TO REPRODUCE, you think that is different from forcing them to bear the child of an unwanted pregnancy? ITS THE FUCKING SAME THING.

[FatSlob]

44. go back and re-read my post.

I don't think that you are getting it.

[athena]

22. Hello? *** Birth control methods fail! ***

The failure rates of the most common contraception methods are listed at Condoms are not 100% Effective. Even when used perfectly correctly, all birth control methods have a nonzero probability of failure.

It's very easy to say, "She should have been more careful" ... as long as you're a man and know that you will never have to deal with this problem yourself.

[FatSlob]

45. also, go back and re-read, carefully.

I'm not disagreeing with you.

[okieinpain]

38. well right now they have the power to make all women on a

national level reproduce against their will.

[MarianJack]

8. Doesn't Matter to *!

His daddy got an abortion for the underage girl he knocked up before it was legal, it could happen again if Roe is overturned.

One of the rethuglicans coming downfall will be the accomplishment of some of their goals. I mean, just think. They have run against some of their favorite social ills for years, gotten elected and then done NOTHING about them. This was because they always wanted that issue to run against again. They will, as always, massively over interpret this election to mean that the country is in a right wing frenzy. They will get their heads handed to them when they start taking rights away AND the problems that they ignored/ran away from in the\is election come home to roost!

[Burma Jones]

10. I agree completely..........................n/t

[Cats Against Frist]

16. I agree with you, sort of

It would split the party, but some of the ideologues in control don't care. I've been battling with this for a while -- trying to figure out exactly how much the religious right is being manipulated, and how much power they actually have.

My guess is that the patients are running the asylum, and I'm not even sure that "big money" has the power to quash some of the religious ideologues, like I'd always hoped it would -- (ironic, eh? Capital! Save me from God!)

I think this is the first thing we have to figure out though -- the exact dynamic and relationship of the elements in the GOP to one another. I DO believe that the religious set and the money set are partially blended, though -- like Raytheon -- flaming Dominionists -- multi-billion-dollar company.

That's when we need to get scared.

Right now, I think we could call their bluff -- but nobody wants to do that.

[grannylib]

13. I'm just so sick of the Reich Wing insisting that everything be black/

white, this/that...there is no nuance, no grey, no contingency plan. It's all one way or the other, with nothing in between. And they call it 'moral clarity' when it's nothing more than arrogant hypocrisy, sadly mischaracterized as "pro-life" vs. "wanton babykillers." It really is an economic issue: they know damn well that if it's made illegal, safe, spendy abortions will still be available to those who can afford them (either paying big time here, or traveling to another country) and those who cannot afford them will continue in a cycle of poverty. This will be exacerbated by restrictions or criminalization of means of reliable birth control, abstinence-only sex "education," no availability of emergency contraception 'morning after,' etc.
Now if someone calls him/herself "pro-life" and is not only anti-abortion, but anti-death penalty and anti-war, and pro-environment and pro-fair labor laws, I accept that. But be consistent. "Pro-choice" is perfectly descriptive; "pro-life" all too often seems to mean "pro-fetal-life" and not much concern for what happens next.

[Cats Against Frist]

14. Uh...I don't think so

They, right now, have the option of getting or not getting an abortion, at their own discretion. This argument is flawed, because the abortion argument and the gay marriage argument are not about "local" control. They're about "Adam and Steve and the Crusade to Save Souls." They cannot give a rational answer to why they're against abortion and against gay marriage, in the framework of rights -- since it REALLY doesn't affect them -- so they're about to change the framewordk, my friends.

America is God's now. God smiles down on us because we're rich. God doesn't want dead fetuses in AMERICA. God doesn't want "reach arounds" in AMERICA.

It's part of a larger worldview -- and they have all the power.

I, and people like me, have been getting the "bah humbugs!" from people when we bring up federalism -- but the thing is, it might be too late for that plan, anyway.

If they have all the power, and they're on a crusade, why would they give us "local control?"

You're making the mistake of believing that these people are actually FOR small government and STATES' RIGHTS and FEDERALISM. These are big-government authoritarian right wingers, who aspire to be BIG GOVERNMENT, RIGHT-WING TOTALITARIANS, and the LAST thing they want is to dismantle the federal government right now.

That's why I like the radical proposal to have the left introduce all the bills that they've pretended that they've been clamouring over for years: the abolition of the income tax, states' rights, de-centralization, the abolition of regulatory agencies, etc.

To keep from losing their power, they'd have to become obstructionists to their own agenda. Blow the doors off the whole thing.

Or, we can keep trying to "reason" with them. Yeah.

Anyway, it doesn't work. It's not "local control" they're after -- it's dominion.

[Bush was AWOL]

17. They won't overturn it

They know overturning it would be a disaster. Plus, they know this issue gives them a significant ammount of votes in elections. THe powers in their party have no intention of overturning this.

I say we encourage the Religious folks to demand action on this. We need to point out that they are phony.

Our pitch should be that they control the presidency, the house, the senate and the courts, so we demand action be taken.

They won't do shit.

[Burma Jones]

20. My Point, more or less

Just say go ahead, make my day........

Even if they did manage to overturn Roe v Wade, they won't get abortion made completely illegal.

[EndElectoral]

18. You need to go back and look at why there was a Roe!

[hangloose]

19. What this administration is after is a 2/3 majority in the senate

when they get that, and after two new appointments are made to the supreme court we will be confronted with the Roe V Wade fight none of us want. How are they going to succeed ? The same way they did this past November, with disinformation on the local level through our religious institutions (for one) and paperless black box voting. The Bushies are not our Representatives any longer they report to a higher order. The only voice we have is our vote, they will not listen to reason. Once the state can steal our vote we have no voice and they have no accountability.

The only way to stop it is to get involved, being a blogger is cool and informative but that alone is not going to change our future.

Pick an issue, the environment, black box voting, taxes, whatever, get involved at the grass roots level in your local community, get others involved. We need to save our republic, time is running out. Once the ideologues secure enough power a reverse of this fascist trend will only come out of revolution. To avoid this, change needs to happen now.

[TheKingfish]

21. I dont understand why we don't want that fight

I give up on Alabama, i just don't care. Don't you see how it would mobilize us like never before if an anti-abortion law were passed in Pennsylvania for instance? We would also shatter the republican party in the process most likely.

[ever_green]

23. I agree 100%

this a losing battle for us. When you think about it, our party is actually more pro-life than the Republicans. By educating kids about safe sex and allowing family planning, we prevent MORE abortions than they do!!
This is what we should emphasize!

[zacho]

24. A Necesary Change

We need to confront social issues head on. The conservatives see abortion as 'this is wrong, it must be outlawed.' We can neutralize the first half and still be pro choice. Our candidates and spokesmen (outside of the bluer states) must start their answers to abortion answers to "Abortion is morally wrong, but it is not in our power as bureaucratic bystanders to tell women what to do." The first step in fixing our social stances is saying the practice of aboriton is morally wrong.

As for letting the Republicans have their way on this issue, I'd say let them so long as they don't leave it up to the states to decide. That would be a win for them.

[ever_green]

25. I hope this change occurs!! It would really help us

We don't need to be labeled as the immoral party. We should be consistent: We care about gays, the poor, are against war and care about the unborn!

[Senator Lamb]

26. im mixed on abortion

no one likes it. but i think it should always be an option. sadly these culture wars are like the war orwell desribed in 1984. it maybe was never meant to win. after all, why would the rove and company want to. look how many people vote against their own economic interests for "moral issues" if those issues were off the table, they would maybe care about the kitchen table then the bedroom. of course, the fundies want the GOP to start acting on legislating morality. but its just a distraction desinged but rich corporations to have the poor and middle class vote in the interest of the rich. i think that was a genius strategy. after all, 90 percent of the country isnt 'rich', so why would they advocate for them. thus the never ending culturual war.

[choicevoice]

27. Let me get this straight. You want us to take the position that

abortion is MORALLY wrong. So all of a sudden we are supposed to switch to their morals? No way in hell. I will tell you what is morally wrong.

It is morally wrong to for an 11 year victim of incest to gestate a fetus for 9 months knowing her body can not handle it. Knowing that it will literally rip her insides up and possibly steralize her for life.

It is morally wrong to force a victim of brutal rape to gestate a fetus for 9 months and put her through the additional trauma that will cause.

It is morally wrong for a desperate female who feels she has no other recourse but to stick a sharp object up into her uterus to self abort which not only kills the fetus but most probably also the mother.

I could go on but let me tell you where they are going with this. They want to illegalize abortion throughout the US. They want to put any doctor who perfoms an abortion on trial for first degree murder with the death penalty. They want to outlaw any contraception that could stop a conception in process. Say bye bye to the birth control pill and RU 486.

If you think this is the wild ranting of some idiot let me assure you that i know my enemy well. I have been fighting these people since 1991 when my daughter was kidnapped at knifepoint and brutally raped. I have defended clinics during their SUMMER SEIGES of womens clinics during the time they thought it was ok to shoot an abortion provider.

If you are against abortion just say it and quit trying to beat around the damn bush about it.. for you see i have a suggestion for you...DON'T LIKE ABORTION... DON'T FUCKING HAVE ONE.

[ever_green]

28. It is morally wrong

So is war, the death penalty...should I shut up about those too? Don't like war, don't start one??? Doesn't work...I fight injustices. I always will.

I make the exceptions of rape, incest and if the mother's life is in danger. Most people do. So your examples are moot.

How can you say it's not immoral? Killing is immoral.

[choicevoice]

30. You are more than welcome to say that YOU think it is immoral.

Do not speak for all people.

[ever_green]

31. I wasn't.

So people who protest the war are speaking for someone else?
I'm stating my opinions and they are the opinions of many, not just republicans. Most democrats I know are against abortion. Not for banning it, but they don't think it's a good thing either.

[selmo7]

76. Agree -

I certainly don't think abortion is morally wrong. One of the possible outcomes of sex - birth control or not - is possible pregnancy. IMO - it is the right and moral thing if one chooses to terminate a pregnancy before allowing it to continue thereby, giving birth to an unwanted child, especially in an environment where there is no healthcare, no means to support that child and even if the mother is going to carry to term knowing they are filled with contempt, resentment, anger, anguish, shame and worry - all unhealthy for a developing fetus. Native American peoples in many tribes have a tradition (they consider moral) in their ways of choosing to abort if it makes sense to do so. They exercise reason rather than rigid notions of morality. Some tribes believe that the quickening (when the human soul comes alive in the fetus) comes when the mother receives the first kick. I think that's an interesting barometer.

What it comes down to is choice and that choice is THAT WOMAN'S CHOICE ONLY - PERIOD.

I am sick and tired of the moralizing about abortion and sex. Sex is part of growing up, just like riding a bike.
I am sick and tired of suppression of eros and subconscious and overt misogyny.
I am sick and tired of the belief that unsafe and illegal abortion is preferential to safe and legal abortion. With that abortion goes back into the hands of the mob - more $$, crime, blackmail.
I am sick of tired of the cavalier notion to just give up your kid for adoption, when that option is loaded with all kinds of emotionally haunting problems, including the birth trauma of separation from the mother.

[smirkymonkey]

36. Who are you to impose your personal morality on all women?

Many people don't believe life starts at conception. Therefore, they do not consider abortion "killing".

[ever_green]

42. I doubt this will go anywhere

I hate to get into this, but what is it if it isn't a life? If I were pregnant, I would think it was a baby in me, a life. Most people do think that.
My main point is that we shouldn't make it seem like we support abortion. We should show that we support prevention. I think that would be smart.

[noiretextatique]

80. we do support abortion because we support women

as moral, adult beings perfectly capable of making their own decisions about their own bodies, and the content therein. you are free to think whatever you chose to think if you become pregnant...can you extend that same right of personhood to other women?

[zacho]

29. Abortion is What Binds the Southern Republicans

When the anti-abortion nuts/ moderate anti-abortion believers think of abortions they're thinking of some 17 year old queen who had pre-marital sex. They aren't thinking of a rape or incest victim. The moral reasons for when abortions would be morally right can not be at the forefront of the argument. We must define it as morally wrong, but necesary to avoid pain and poverty. It may cost us Democrats a few angry liberals in California, Massachusetts and New York but it will help us out in the heartland.

[KitSileya]

69. Not to mention,

because abortion rates are tied to how sure a woman is that she can raise the child, numbers went down under Clinton, and up during Reagan, Bush and Bush.

If women have a safety net around them, they will be more likely to keep 'accidental' babies. But they should never have to.

[Rev_Karl]

32. I agree 95%

I just read through the text of Roe V. Wade. Personally, I agree with many of the arguments that the defendants put forth - but it's all such a personal issue isn't it? Generally I fully agree with the values of choice but people sometimes make terrible, selfish choices.

Maybe the anti-abortion people are right on this one. I don't have a problem with the notion that abortion is murder when it's done for convenience, and I can see where some would find the idea horrifying. I do however, have a problem with the concept that the fetus has more rights than the mother when it comes to her life. The fetus must never be allowed to kill the mother and this is an issue best left to physicians.

For years I gave it little analysis and saw the issue as a fundamental tenet of my Liberal ideology. As a Liberal I value choice. I think that people should be able to make their own choices with the understanding that in doing so, they must never infringe on others rights (Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for instance) As a Liberal, I value human life and dignity above everything else. The concept that a fetus may share some of these rights, because it is in fact an unborn human, does not necessarily fall outside of these values.

Upon my own introspection I have to admit that maybe they have a point; maybe the Roe v. Wade decision was made in an atmosphere where restraint and life did not hold enough value. There are so many people that vote on this issue alone, they have for a very long time and they always will, perhaps their persistence demonstrates its moral validity.

My father in law and most of his side of our family always put the abortion issue first. We can grow our movement in spite of them but if we temper our policy on this one, they may be willing to join us. It might also be the right thing to do.

[askew]

39. 55% of the country is pro-choice. Women vote in larger

numbers then men. More women vote for the Democrats than the Republicans due in large part to their strong defense of womens' reproductive rights. If the Democrats fail to defend Roe v. Wade or put forth a pro-life presidential candidate, you will have a lot of women voters sit on their hands in the next presidential election. And those gains will not be made up for on the other side by winning anti-choice voters, because they are a minority of voters. A vocal minority, but still a minority of this country's voters. Also, why would an anti-choice voter choose the Democratic candidate over the Republican, if that was their most important issue? Republicans have a longer history of trying to take away this right for women. If I was anti-choice, I would trust the Republican.

People are falling for the Republican spin here. There may be some voters to be gained by giving up womens' civil liberties, but you are going to lose just as many votes trying to woo those voters. This is an issue that many women are litmus test voters on and will not be swayed period.

As for having the states regulate abortion, it would illegal in most states in a heartbeat. Go to Planned Parenthood or NARAL and read about what the states are doing right now to take away womens' rights to abortion, contraceptives, limiting sex ed. classes, etc. "Pro-lifers" do not want to get rid of abortion because it kills babies, this is about controlling women. Because if they were worried about abortion, they should be screaming their heads off about the increase in abortions under Bush*. But as usual, they don't care, as long as women lose rights.

[Rev_Karl]

48. how many "pro-choice" people are also "anti-abortion" ?

I wish that there was a way to have a special election, only for women, to decide this issue fair and square. In a fair and fully enlightened democracy the men would have to sit this one out. Unfortunately it appears that even our ability to conduct a fair and accurate general election is failing. In a better world this would be an issue to be decided only by females.

Try to understand that I'm trying to explore the common ground here. I feel that if we can come to a new reasoned position on this issue, within our values, then we can draw off huge proportion of the other 45%. If we can temper our position we can own the issue and be righteous for it. The republicans will never really address it; they have given lip service to it for 30 years and have done nothing because it’s their magic carpet to power. I propose we pull the rug out from under them and do it in a way that everyone can embrace.

People ARE falling for the spin. The last 30 years has been defined by extremists on both sides. The extremists on our side framed it as "Choice" while those on the right framed it as "Life" The framing of the issue has devolved into absolutes – In today’s mindset either you are for or against ALL abortion. 30 years on, that's how most people think.

Although I am against most abortion I also strongly believe that it's unrealistic and counterproductive to outlaw all abortions, the mothers life is should always be the predominant factor.

If 55% of women are “pro-choice,” then 45% of them are not, at least by that terminology. If we can find a way to change our position within our core values - then we will gain very many of those who are not "anti-abortion" but "pro-life” The people who are truly "pro-life" also are anti war and anti capitol-punishment. Many of the “pro-life” are already with us.

I don't want to outlaw abortion any more than I want to outlaw dentists. No matter how much I resent the existence of dentistry it is sometimes necessary. Should we ban all abortion? Absolutely not. But I do no see it as solely a matter of free choice and convenience either. The unborn human is at least partially human; because I am human I hold it in higher regard than, say a toad. Our position at this time holds all abortion to be acceptable, this position is wrong.

Don’t forget that many women do vote solely on this issue – they feel unrestrained abortion is immoral and they see us as supporting that. To them we advocate all abortions, it makes no difference what our candidates say about their personal feelings – if they do nothing then the Democrats must approve. It’s not fair, but because it’s been framed this way in the American mind for so long it falls on us to address it.

Please don’t misunderstand my intentions. There are terrible people who are riding this issue to repress women and anyone else they can lash out at. We can’t disregard all of the issues simply because they claim them. This can be our issue as well, in our terms, under our values. Many people are fundamentally conflicted on this. Perhaps it is time as Democrats to give these people their due.

We need not fear those who use this issue as part of a larger scheme to subjugate women. We can keep their bullshit in check through law, this is not the end-all of reproductive rights. Bad people have used this issue to as a vehicle to victory but they don’t care about it fundamentally - they only see it as a vessel to power. If we can take it away from them in a way that we find acceptable then they’ve lost their ride and we gain the high ground.

I think there may be a fundamental difference in our perspective here. Please understand that I respect yours. The slippery slope is the definition of where life begins. Honestly, we have no way of knowing for sure. Maybe we should be more respectful of the fact that we don’t.

[bklyncowgirl]

52. That would be me.

I think that abortion is a tragedy. That being said, I also think that it must be legal. If it were illegal you would still have abortion compounded by the greater tragedy of desperate young (and not so young) women getting back alley abortions, doctors ending up in jail for trying to help them and an incredible amount of misery.

Easily available and affordable birth control and education is the way to minimize abortions.

[davsand]

58. CHOICE is not an extremist position.

I fail to understand how any rational person can state absolutely that abortion needs to go away, or even that women shouldn't be allowed to determine for themselves if bearing a child is right for them.

I understand the desire to make this a non-issue. I really do. It would be so very nice if we all could progress to a time when every child is a chosen one and all homes are stable economically sound ones. That is not, however, the reality we all live in.

Contraceptives fail--and the SAME people who want to limit abortion refuse to allow funding for contraceptive research so that MAYBE we could get to the point where we have freely available contraceptives that don't fail and don't kill women.

The REALITY is that those people who yell so loudly about stopping abortion could give a shit about the women they will kill and the misery they will bring to this world. These strident souls have the opinion that sex is bad and women are bad for having it. They don't seem to worry about MEN doing it--just the idea that women need to be punished for being sexually active (even if it IS rape.)

I realize you are gonna peg me as a strident bitch from NOW or some equally "offensive" group, but the bottom line is I have a seven year old daughter and I never want her to bleed to death from a coat hanger abortion or die from infection caused by a back alley abortion on a kitchen table. I don't think ANY woman should face the choice between a forced pregnancy or unsafe termination of a pregnancy.

I realize it is uncomfortable to discuss this subject--just like gay marriage or any other issue where sex is involved. No matter how inconvenient it is, no matter how uncomfortable it is, abortion will not go away and giving it a pass because it is divisive is not an option. We owe it to our daughters to defend the right to choice.

I defy you to stand in front of a room full of young girls and tell them that they deserve to die or suffer because it was a politically expedient decision. I sure as hell can't do it, nor will I. Further, I defy you to stand and tell anyone that any group of humans is less capable of making personal decision and thus less deserving of basic self determination.

IF the time comes that the Dem party abandons women, or other human rights issues, then so be it. I'll form my own damn party and I'll fight my fights with like minded people who actually feel that we owe something to the future rather than worrying about confronting an uncomfortable issue.


Laura

[Rev_Karl]

81. I did not say that choice is extremist position

Only that these words have been used by extremists on both sides to divide everyone. I wish I could have made it more clear.

I don't want to see all abortions illegal, back alley abortions ar any of that crap. I just want to look at this and see if we can save the issue using our ideals.

See post #49 - Nesco lays it out in a much better way.

[choicevoice]

60. the slippery slope is you wanting to put my personal reproductive

choices up for a vote.

[JPJones]

35. This is triangulation

There will be three strategies to follow:

1. Obstructionism
2. Appeasement
3. Triangulation

What will they have to run on without Roe v. Wade? Sure, you can say that they would next make abortion a federal crime, but that would be a serious affront to state's rights.

Abortion would still be legal in the blue states.

[question everything]

37. Let the abolishing of Slavery be overturned

"I suggest that it is time to change the battle from a judicial battle to a legislative battle."

How does this sound?

And how about the right to be represented by an attorney, and the right to a trial by Jury? The right to a safe, legal abortion is the same as other rights specified in the Constitution.

[pinballer]

43. hey, if it means getting the hard core Rightwing out. of Washington....

I have long thought that i'd love to see the Dems just go ahead and yield to the religious Right on abortion.

Yes, women would be denied their right......but at least the Dems would be assured of kicking the anti-environmentalist, anti-democratic, warmongerering Neo-Cons out of the White house.

The future of the planet is important enough to make sacrifices for.

[ever_green]

46. thank you. Another unselfish person.

The environment is the number one issue to me.

[uncertainty1999]

47. THE FIGHT IS *NOT* ABOUT ABORTION!

If Roe v. Wade is overturned, these Talibanicans are not going to just say 'ok, great' and enjoy their hobbies. They are ALREADY saying that birth control pills equal abortion (a doc in Milwaukee is refusing to provide these to her patients and some pharmacist in TX is doing the same). This is about women having control over their lives. This is a country that wants a gay marriage (or flag burning) amendment but has not constitutionally guaranteed women's equality.

Why caving in on roe v. wade is a bad idea:

If it is not abortion, it is birth control
If it not birth control, it is going to be divorce (or gay marriage!)
If it is not divorce (or gay marriage), it is going to be "working mothers"
If it is not working mothers, it is going to be women who do not want the crap beat out of them by their husbands
If it is not these uppity women, it is.. .... burqa time

[robbedvoter]

56. Thank you! It's the democracy stupid - elections, peace, jobs, Earth

Don't go in their slimy minds - you'll catch stoopid

[Iris]

70. It's about economic justice.

Women who have babies that are unplanned face a greater risk of poverty than if they have babies that are planned.

[selmo7]

78. YUUP - What they really want is to outlaw SEX itself

except in cases where you are having a child.

This is why their answer is ABSTINENCE, ABSTINENCE, ABSTINENCE.

That's what it is REALLY all about.

I know of a fundy Catholic who felt this way and had 10 kids and she felt guilty for having sex with her own husband when they weren't trying to consciously have babies. It was against her "religion" (as she so rigidly interpreted it) so she had to confess it to the priest every week....ewwwwwwwww.

I know of a Mormon man who after his wife had four kids, she wanted no more sex because sex had served its purpose for her. He felt like HE was the breeder and they are now divorced.

They don't believe in sex for pleasure and deepening of relationshiop. Not on their radar.

thus that is why they think SEX IS BAD and should be outlawed except for the case of baby-making.

And why is SEX bad? Because of EVE. She ate the apple and she was female and females are BAD!

That is why their god is ALL MALE. Says it all. God is male. Males are good. Females bad -

Indigenous religions believe in a God that is both male and female and so does Buddhism in the nonpersonal - yin/yang. Makes a big difference.

[necso]

49. If we can keep from losing entirely on an issue (long, long rant)

by making it a states rights issue, then I am generally for it.

Same sex marriage is already (effectively) a state issue, as is stem cell research (or so I believe). (BTW, the initiative in California is good for us relative to other states -- both in jobs and money.)

Personally, I think that Roe v Wade is in serious jeopardy (of course, the neo-cons are denying this through their many agents), and if so, some preemptive strike might be wise. The neo-cons definitively need to reward the fundies -- and this is the fundie number one issue. Moreover, the fundies have no intention of stopping at Roe, and with Roe gone the neo-cons will just dangle the next prize in front of fundie faces. -- And once Scotus is packed, the opportunity will have passed.

Now, imagine a constitutional amendment that bundles a bunch of issues and allows them to be decided on a state by state basis -- a basis where we still have some real power. Not only does such an amendment have to pass a large number of states, but then individual bills would have to pass in each (or many) of these states. And lots of stuff can happen over that time.

Of course if we can really defend an issue on the federal level, then pushing it out to the states is unnecessary retreat. But when you are not the dominant force, it can be folly to try to defend everything everywhere -- for you can end up losing everything everywhere.

As a good example of what happens to those who don't act in advance of defeat to prevent or mitigate it, consider AWB. For years, in face of negative feedback, we have kept to our pro-AWB position, -- and we lost one and probably two elections because of this. Now we have no AWB (and won't in the foreseeable future) and we might lose a lot of other ground along with it.

So tell me how we are better off now? -- Are our cherished "principles" still intact? -- Are our halos still untarnished? Hey, in my view, if you can't defend a principle in practise, then what you have is pretense not principle... and clinging to pretense is simply childish. Adults make tough trade-offs based on (often grim) reality -- they don't push blindly forward based solely on their own version of "faith".

Myself, I think that abortion is an issue for a woman to decide, and it would be unfortunate if a woman had to travel some distance to have one. But it is better than nothing and such women could be aided with transportation, lodging, etc. Hell, I'll even chip in a few bucks.

And I hope that you realize that one of the ways that you are being (widely) manipulated is to appeal to your cherished "ideals" -- getting you all fired up about what it means to be "liberal" (as a set of meaningless one dimensional yes/no "points") -- so you then spread yourself out in a thin, weak line that can't be defended.

It is simply current history (and the repetition of an ancient pattern) that fundamentalism is on the rise in many faiths and regions, and the neo-cons are using this as one leg of their strategy, as they go from strength to strength, and win to win. And what? -- Are you going to stop these trends using the same one dimensional logic and outlook that the neo-cons have constructed to defeat you (eg, Dems are going take your guns -- guns yes/no) -- and the tactics that this outlook forces upon you?

Turning to states rights would change the battlefield and represent a fundamental attack on the whole neo-con strategy. It would also turn the focus to the states and emphasize how the neo-cons have hurt these states --- and how they have expanded the federal government and its power.

Look, rigidity in thinking is fine as long as reality doesn't intrude. But can you honestly tell me that reality hasn't intruded in these last four years?

And yes, the neo-cons have cheated in this and previous elections. But some cheating always goes on -- you just have to cheat better -- or build bigger margins. Doing the first would make us no better than them (do you really want to go there?). And I don't think that we can gain new voters faster than they can steal votes (and gain their own new voters), so we have to attack their vote pool, gaining some of these voters, making others lose interest and setting (yet) others against each other.

And yes, I was always against the AWB. But I also saw it as a trade-off for Roe -- which I have supported unconditionally -- just like I always give my loyalty. (And it is true that I have said nothing about seeing this as a trade-off , but pro-gun posts here have generally gone over about as well as dog farts at a tea party -- for example, some time ago, I suggested an AWB compromise -- and got dumped on like an open freeper.)

And if you don't like my post, alert it. But remember that I was fighting neo-cons face to face when most of you guys didn't even know who (or what) they were. (And of course you must also recognize that another neo-con manipulative tactic is to get you to lump all Republicans, or all Christians, or all gun-owners, or all whatever in one group, so that you attack them all blindly -- the same damn thing that you all hate so much when it is applied to any of your "favorites".)

Look, regardless of whether you guys really want to win, or just to pose, you will have my support... but it would be a lot better for the country if we could win.

And we could have won this one on either guns or ground game (or so I believe). But the ground level machinery just isn't in place yet (where the hell is my precinct captain -- and why the hell hasn't he ever contacted me), it will take time to build it, and it will take lots of work to maintain it. Sure we can do this, and we can recruit new voters, but going after their voters can give us the old -1/+1 advantage -- or at least make our overall job easier.

Now, I realize that I am ranting at length and probably pissing many of you off, but as weregild, let me tell you about a very important concept -- the concept of emergence.

Emergence is, in essence, recognizing that "shit happens" -- and that sometimes things are just going to fall out in a certain way -- and then recognizing that the best thing that you can do in these circumstances is to try, as best you can, to redirect the emerging event to your own ends.

And this is how I would have recommended getting out of Iraq (likely emergent outcomes can be bound, and the course to the best (probable) one can be expedited). Of course, now the neo-cons are just going to go for the old fashioned beatdown there (and elsewhere) -- after all, it works so well with us.

...

Sniff, sniff -- who let that dog in here?

Oh, and of course we have to try to stop the cheating -- but this might well prove a long hard slog, and they can be expected to react to our efforts there. Cheating will never entirely disappear.

[drdon326]

50. NO. FUCKING.WAY.

They are playing you......these RWW want the dems to abandon the rights of women.

[robbedvoter]

51. You're a guy, right? No daughters., live on Mars?

[Burma Jones]

74. I have a daughter and live in a state that wouldn't ban abortion

and if they did, we would go to Canada.

[arwalden]

53. Buy Stock In Acme Knitting Needle Company

[sadiesworld]

54. Interesting idea.

I don't know that it would ever fly, but the idea of pulling the cultural issues rug out from under the repugs is appealing.

Imagine if god, guns, gays (and abortion) were irrelvant in national elections. I believe this country would take a hard left turn on the environment, trade, and foreign policy.

I also think the fundies might see the error of their ways when confronted with the consequences of their positions. Certainly, the inevitable decrease in GOP funding for religious "outreach" would have an enormous impact on our emerging theocracy.

[EndElectoral]

55. Do more libs get abortions? Enough so to turn the election around?

[Iris]

72. I'd say half the women I know who've had abortions probably voted for Bush

[bleedingheart]

59. I won't cry when some conservative's daughter dies of sepsis

due to a botched abortion...I may feel bad for the girl but the parents won't get my sympathy...

[Iris]

71. No - you should hope Brittanny Spears is the test case for a neede

3rd trimester abortion. After all, she has come out and said she supports President Bush and we should listen to what he tells us.

So, go Brittanny, get yourself knocked up. Just hope your doctor doesn't find out your baby has half a brain in the 8th month of your pregnancy.

[choicevoice]

61. If the democratic party is too far left for you maybe you should

start your own party. Call it the Moderate Party. You could find the middle on every issue or make a list of what rights that are not yours to give that you are willing to give away so you can win an election. Better yet take a poll of all the red states and there is your party platform.

[zacho]

62. Abortion's benefit to the Democrats

I don't think it helps the Democrats at all outside of the blue states. The Democrats didn't argue abortion from a moral stand point this year. Instead they decided to avoid talking directly about the issue. The result was the Repugs having an issue where they were talking morals right back to their base. I'm moderately pro-choice although abortion isn't at the top of the issues list I care about. We need to start by saying "We need to work to reduce the number of abortions." The moderately pro-life dislike us because they don't hear the Democrats ever saying "that in general abortions are morally abhorable." Our current policy is broke so we must fix it.

[noiretextatique]

79. abortion should be safe, legal...and rare.

this is the position of the democratic party, and it's sensible, fair and reasonable.

[sadiesworld]

64. Why are you suggesting that the poster doesn't belong in this party?

We NEED to start thinking outside of the box. And it IS a box that our corporate elite masters have placed us in.

Do you honestly think that those who wield the real power in this country give a rat's ass about abortion, gay marriage, or any of the other issues that keep us at each other's throats?

They only hope that we are sufficiently distracted so they can turn the US into a banana republic and the planet into war zone.

We better start coming up with some ideas.

[robbedvoter]

65. Or maybe this party is gone in every way, not just from power

if its members start ditching group after group after group. Gays, women - who is next?
I don't care, I left the party in July when I smelled the phony.

[sadiesworld]

68. The party has been "ditching" groups for some time.

Clinton "ditched" factory workers and the poor.

Gay Marriage IS a state issue, so we're really talking about abortion.

I am pro-choice and am not endorsing the OP's premise, BUT s/he makes some valid points that I think are worth discussing. Sometimes a different perspective can lead to useful strategy ideas.

I doubt republicans sit around and police their discussions so as not to offend anyone.

BTW, I too am disgusted with the party and Kerry.

[fortyfeetunder]

63. Another little smarmy detail- Viagra, Cialis, Levitra

Have you noticed lately the proliferation of the male sexual enhancement drugs Viagra, Cialis, and Levitra? And IIRC, men could get in most cases medical insurance coverage for these drugs while women for the most part can't even get contraceptive drugs covered on their insurance.

Why not tell these impotent men who want to use this drug maybe abstinence is best?

[robbedvoter]

67. because they "won" and we have to submit now.

That seems to be the going "wisdom" Ignore the theft, crawl to tou victorious enemy - beg for forgiveness and permission to assimilate

[zacho]

82. Catholics

If we ever want to be competitive with Catholics again we will need to say explicitly that we agree that 'abortion is morally abhorable, but necesary to avoid poverty.' Poverty has to be the new focus not putting one's morals over everyone. When the Catholics heard that shpeal from Kerry they were thinking that Kerry said that abortion was moral.

[jpgray]

66. Let slavery be reenacted in the Southern states, I mean come on

:crazy:

Sorry--I would have to turn in my progressive decoder ring if I allowed this injustice to go through.

[in_cog_ni_to]

73. Well, since this post comes from a man, I would have to say

NO FUCKING WAY do we just let Roe v. Wade be overturned. Do you have any idea what we women went through to get that passed? Being a man, you probably don't. Think back alleys and clothes hangers. :grr: Dammit.

[noiretextatique]

77. oh c'mon...what's a few women dying

compared to groveling at the feet our lords and masters? if we let you kill a few women, will you stop being so mean to us...please? :puke: