Democrats need to drop their pro-choice stance

I really think Democrats are on the wrong side of this issue. It's killing the party and it really drives a wedge between good people. I know there are some difficult situations that one might bring up, like the dangerous alternative of back-alley abortions or suicides or babies in dumpsters, but how can people condone abortion? How can you say it's anything but wrong?

I'm not religious and I don't think it's a religious issue at all, it is a matter of right and wrong. Making abortion safe and legal implies acceptance doesn't it?

Here's my stance: Abortion should be allowed in the instances of rape, incest or if the mother's life is in danger. What other good reasons are there?

I don't know what the solution is, but maybe a fine or something? It should not be a form of birth control though. You have rights, reproductive rights, but once a child is conceived the rights of the child come into play. How about adoption?

Now where I disagree strongly with religious Republicans is the matter of sex ed. I think kids need to be taught safe sex and not just abstinence. In fact, if you are truly pro-life you will not support Bush. His policies have increased the number of abortions. One of his first acts as president in 2000 was to restrict funding for overseas family-planning agencies. What does this do? Increase abortions!
The U.S. has the highest rate of teen pregnancy of any industrialized nation! In parts of the country (the south) that have more funding for abstinence-only programs, that rate is even higher.

Can anyone else see the issue my way? Abortion is wrong. We should prevent it, not just ban it. Why do religious people place the (supposed) immorality of sex out of wedlock above the prevention of the taking of a life?
Another issue where religion blinds people to the appropriate and moral direction.

 

hmm I think you have a point Ashawn..you are right..now people like Campbell54 will go to hell...SEE YA THERE CAMPBELL!

 

thanks Heather. I just think the best way to manage abortion is to prevent unplanned pregnancies. Educating women is an effective method. So is educating the youth on how to protect themselves. To ignore the issue of teen sex only worsens the matter. The religious right refuses to see this.

 

actually you are right, we need to educate

 

Well, aren't abortion rights important to most Democrats? Isn't that the reason many people vote Democrat? It would be kind of odd for them to reverse their stance on abortion, when they have promoted a pro-choice ideology for so long. It would appear too obviously lame and staged for them to do such a thing, because people would realize it's for the sake of winning votes from Republican voters, further selling the party and its devotees out (as if that's even possible at this point).

It's one of the few issues Democrats differ from Republicans on anymore. Abortion rights is one of the Democratic Party's main selling points. Gay marriage and stem cells would not be enough to win the people over, considering most people don't have a clue when it come to issues of geo-politics and the destruction of civil liberties, which, in reality, far outweigh anything else at the moment.

So really, aside from these smoke-screen issues, what would the Democrats have to run on that strongly differs from the Republicans?

The two parties are becoming more centralized. I am sure it's only a matter of time before Democrats begin taking on an anti-abortion stance as well, to keep up with the Republicans as this country turns more and more into a theocracy under another four-year reign at the cold hands of George W. Bush.

I am not a fan of abortion, but I do think women should have the right to decide for themselves, taking into consideration the stage of fetal development. But I think an outright banment of abortion would only take this country even further back in the opposite direction. And yes, the result of banning abortion is a major issue as well.

 

Well, I need some democrats to respond, I don't know how most democrats feel about abortion. I know people who voted for Kerry that are very pro-life, but for economic reasons and antiwar reasons, voted against Bush. I don't ususally call myself "pro-life" because that implies an association with the religious right. I am against abstinence-only programs. This is where Democrats differ from Republicans. And my main point is that, in effect, Deomocrats actually prevent more abortions than Republicans! If they could get this information out, maybe true pro-life people would see that.

I don't know what the answer is, but dems have to get away from the pro-abortion picture they've painted of themselves. I think they should emphasize prevention. There's just no way to make abortion sound acceptable. This is a salient issue and it's enough to turn people away from the party.

I agree that it would look suspicious, but the shift could happen over time.

 

Do what? The two parties have been centralized for quite some time.

If this country ever turns into a theocracy as you suggest, well, ok that is just a stupid statement. Really dude, pull your head out of your ass.

 

Obviously, it didn't hurt Clinton, and it didn't keep Gore from winning the popular vote. What we have here is analysis based on single issue voters. If you ask a single issue voter why Kerry lost, well don't be surprised if it turns out that they think their single issue is the explanation for everything.

I think the Democrats should chill and wait for the anti-abortion voters to realise that with a republican congress and senate and white house, they still aren't going to get abortion banned. So they may as well start considering other issues at the ballot box because they republican party is playing them for chumps

 

So the solution to the problem is for the Dems to eliminate one of the few things that still distinguishes them from the GOP?!?!

It's bad enough that the party has sold out its traditional base on economic, labor, civil liberties, and foreign policy issues, and now you want to alienate another huge chunk of the base--whatever is left of the feminist/women's rights movement? WTF?

If pro-choice goes away, exactly WHAT will be left to clearly define the difference between the Dems and the GOP?

I personally don't care for abortion either (and am an adoptive parent), but I also don't believe in forcing my personal moral code into a woman's uterus! The woman who has to carry the fetus should have the ULTIMATE authority over HER BODY.

Safe, Legal, and RARE abortions is what progressives should be striving for here. Anything else is giving into the bible-thumpers.

OTOH, you might have a point here...if the dems dump the pro-choice stance, it will finally kill off the stinking shithole that is the democratic party, and open the way for the Greens or another progressive party to pick up their former members.

 

Bearing in mind that I usually avoid abortion debates like the plague....

Pressed Rat has a point. I tend to vote Democratic (though consider myself independent and an issue voter) and I'm pro choice. I used to feel it was just the mother's choice, but the more I think about it, it does seem pretty wrong. So Pressed Rat's point that we should take into consideration the stage of development is a good idea. Nothing should be allowed past a certain point except if the mother's life is in peril. It'd be up to the doctors and lawmakers to choose a time, I would think somewhere about the beginning second trimester makes the most sense. Really, you should know by then what you're going to do. But doctors should be less willing to just perform them no questions asked. Maybe we could have certain requirements be met before a doctor can perform an abortion. We need to stop using this as birth control. Waiting till the new life has formed and is growing isn't the best time to be doing that. Use birth control.

And that is my second point. Education about safe sex should be included in sex ed classes so that young women can make responsible informed decisions. It is senseless to assume teens are going to practice abstinence till they're married, the world just isn't like that anymore (and probably never was). I think this would cut the number of unwanted pregnancies greatly and reduce the need for abortion anyways.

I don't think the democrats should go completely pro-life because it is important that there be a decision by the mother. I don't want the government dictating what women can do to their bodies. But I think they need to revise their standing on this, in the ways I mentioned, because being fully pro-choice for the whole pregnancy isn't working out. Face the facts, the country is conservative on this issue.

 

I read an interesting theory a while ago, that the Democratic and Republican parties are going to merge in the near future as the Republicans drift left, and a new party, the Conservative party, will form as the new right-wing party. It seems more likely that what you said will occur, because the Democrats are drifting right.

 

Democrats don't even need to drop their pro-choice stand.

Just reverse their stand of Roe V Wade.

It's bad law, and bad precident, and it coops up discussion and movement on the issue, since discussion and movement of something that proportedly "In The Constitution", is impossible; until cooped up emotion becomes explosive. That explosive emotion has provided the GOP with the House, the Senate, and the White House in 5 of the last 7 elections.

Everyone knows abortion is not in the constitution, but it was simply a democratic strategy in 1973 to sneak it in via that route.


Reverse the defense of Roe, and let if fall.
Then Abortion can be decided on a state-by-state basis.

In Nebraska it will probably fall.
But in California, Oregon, Washington, Delaware, NY, Michigan, PA, MD, RI etc.....

And isn't that the way it really ought to be anyway?

 

In addition to backing off its support for the convoluted Roe v. Wade fiat, Democrats should stop thwarting these modest (and popular) abortion restrictions:

parental notification for minors
informed consent (w/ waiting period)
eliminate taxpayer subsidies
ban all second and third trimester abortions unless the mother's life is endangered

 

Yeah, those all seem reasonable. Unless there is a crime involved, like incest or rape.


Everyone else: good responses, these are things that need to be sorted out. I'm glad to see many of you that are pro-choice say "but I'm not fond of abortion". This is how all the pro-choice people I know feel too. That is why I think it is detrimental to the party that the strict feminists have sort of defined our stance on abortion. Many of them almost promote it. Planned Parenthood sells t-shirts that proclaim- "I had an abortion". This is what Republicans see our party as supporting. I just think we should emphasize prevention through education and planning and show that in this way we are the true pro-life party.
I too am reluctant to let the gov. have power like that, but we have to do something diff.

I wasn't just saying this as a way for Democrats to become elected next time, this is just how I feel on the issue. Listening to all the after-election talk, it seems there is a viewpoint held by many that the Democratic party is not one of morals, and this is why. Nevermind the hypocrisy of Republicans (war is moral??), but if we shift our stance on this, we will be more consistent: we care about the poor, the elderly, victims of war, the environment and all animals, AND the unborn.

 

Dumping the pro-choice stance would kill the party. perhaps if they said they were "pro decision" instead, it would make the idea sound a bit more serious, but even many republicans are pro-choice.

 

I doubt it. If anything, it would lend credibilty and consistency to their claim to represent the disenfranchised, as Green Thumb has noted. Nobody is more voiceless and powerless than the unborn.

See http://www.democratsforlife.org.

The Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act is another common-sense measure that moderate Democrats should support:

http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/fetal_pain/index.html

 

Green Thumb, I completely agree with this statement. I have always been for better education. Having grown up in a private "Christian" school and seeing so many poor girls knocked up because no one taught them about safe sex, it is very sad. (good thing I had common sense to get on the pill). However, if the dems were to drop the abortion issue, that makes them more and more like republicans. I mean I already think that there are too many similarities between the two parties that is why I'm Green, but that would make it even worse. This is just my thoughts on it though. Abortion should never be used as birth control, but I don't see how taking away choices helps anyone in this country. And as far as it being an issue, I don't really see it as that big of an issue before. Maybe it is because I'm older and I don't really see this in my circle of friends anymore. I just didn't think that teen pregnancy and abortion were so out of control (as I know it had been in the past) that it really needs to be monitored. I don't think it is anyone's business really. But that is just my opinion. I definitely don't get involved in the abortion debate here anymore, gave that up years ago. I just think that if we solved some of our other social problems that this would almost take care of itself. Then abortions would be only used when necessary as they were designed to be.

 

"Drop abortion, and the democrats become more like republicans?"



Well I suppose in at least one way that would be true -- neither of them would be supporting abortion.

On the other hand, drop abortion and millions of people who feel obligated to vote for the GOP would be voting again for democrats.

 

Are you serious, they sell those shirts? Tasteless and terrible. It's becasue of organizations like that the Democratic Party is loosing members, and it's becasue of groups like the Christian Coalition and the 700 Club the Republican Party is loosing members.

I think the idea that a new conservative party might form, like the greens did with the democrats, is a good prediction, but isnt the reformed party and such like that?

 

First of all, Ben Affleck despises George Bush and endorsed John Kerry.

Second of all, just because they're actors doesn't mean they're uninformed. Most of these people are more informed than dumbass Alabama bumpkins, because they're actually from an enlightened region of the country. Of course there are exceptions, but the ones you mentioned (Bruce Springsteen and Moby) are very intelligent people.

Why shouldn't actors be allowed to speak their minds regarding the election?