Senate Abortion: Why not?

I meant what I said.

 

The abortion debate as it relates to Christians is such an odd one. I went to a conservative Christian HS and we were told we were murderers if we got an abortion or approved of our partner getting one. The Vatican is, of course, vehemently against abortion, and there's been plenty of violence against abortion doctors thanks to outspoken radical Christians (such as Bill O'Reilly).

And yet! More Catholics in America identify as Democrats. I have a feeling the abortion issue is going to really explode within religious communities. We already see some of this in Ireland as they fight for a woman's right to control her body. A bishop there actually came out FOR repealing the eighth amendment. I never thought I'd see such a thing.

According to recent polling, Catholics in America generally favor abortion, and we see more opposition from Protestants. So, it seems like Catholics are discarding the Vatican's viewpoint for one reason or another.

I have a feeling the religious nature of this debate will only get more complicated as time goes on.

 

i thank Pope Frank.

hey,that rhymes.

 

I think that the Catholic opposition to birth control has really backfired in terms of making people realize that they disagree with the Church and can live in contradiction to its teachings without any particular spiritual harm and a lot of pragmatic benefit.

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/15/abortion-trump-supreme-court-roe-wade-473601

A major push at the state level while Republicans are still in control. It will be interesting to see where it goes.

 

https://jezebel.com/anti-abortion-leader-who-was-kicked-out-of-the-womens-m-1825338127

We're now getting to the intersection of "anti-abortion 'feminists'" and "white nationalism"... probably not much of a stretch for many of them, one presumes...

 

Personally I resent the flippant implication that pro-life feminists like myself are probably all Trump-supporting White Nationalists.

I mean, when I brought up how the Democratic platform's staunch opposition to *any* abortion restrictions, even the ones they have in all of Europe, hurt Democrats with independent voters... All Dani said was, "But Republicans are worse!" Which is no better than all the Trump supporters who deflect all criticism of him with, "But Hillary!" I said nothing at all about Republicans. I had posted a mainstream liberal article about how the Democratic platform of late term abortions is harmful to the country because it leads to more Republicans in office. And for what? A handful of genuinely irresponsible women who don't get abortions before the baby is viable and would not be allowed to be aborted without medical reason in any country in Europe?

I don't get this. And I don't get why not a single pro-choice person here I've ever asked about our laws vs European law has ever, ever answered. All I get is "well Republicans..." Even though I'm not a Republican and never have been, and have said I won't vote for any of them until they act to get Trump out.

Also, just because this single person turned out to be horrible also doesn't mean it was right to kick all pro-life women out of the women's march. Especially because many of those women are women of color, who are already basically excluded from many liberal movements.

 

I said "many" not "all." I don't believe you're in the 53% of white women that voted for Trump either, and that's "most"...

 

You have, however, said that being pro-choice was a prerequisite for being a feminist, and that my opinions have no place in the public sphere. Your words exactly. Which is part of the exact problem I'm talking about.

Hispanics, for instance, are split 50/50 on abortion. When Democrats take your hardline stance, they tell half of our nation's largest minority not to vote Democrat.

 

Just a few comments to note here:

Democratic support for late-term abortions is generally overblown. This is as much disinformation by Republicans who try to paint Democrats as extreme on this issue as Democrats who claim that all pro-life Republicans are anti-birth control. The total number of late-term abortions that occur is somewhere around 0.3% of all abortion procedures, and they are nearly always done to save the life and/or health of the mother. I say "nearly" all and not "every one" as I do not have access to the medical records of women who have undergone the procedure and therefore cannot make that claim.

That being said, I would have no problem at all with a late-term elective abortion ban at the federal level, but said ban would need to have an airtight exception for maternal life and health, not just in space, but in time as well. Medical emergencies are just that; there generally isn't time to go to a judge and get an injunction. Congressional attempts to outlaw abortion after 20 weeks have lacked said exceptions, and therefore died (as they should).

If we are to find common ground on this issue, then the dishonesty needs to stop. Democrats need to be open to more abortion restrictions after the first trimester, and Republicans, quite frankly, need to stop telling lies about what abortion in America is. It most certainly is NOT:

1) Done overwhelming in the 3rd-trimester
2) A "big business" (most counties in the US lack a single abortion provider)
3) Done against a pregnant woman's will (women are not 'brainwashed' by physicians to undergo abortions)
4) A risk factor for breast or any other type of cancer (medically disproven by high-quality evidence).

If we can move beyond rhetoric, we might make some progress on this issue. But for that to happen, the extreme voices on both sides of the debate are going to have to be shouted down.

In other words, there will need to be tolerance.

 

If only Roe v. Wade hadn't had the trimester-framework removed in favor of "fetal viability" in Planned Parenthood v. Casey we wouldn't be having so many of these problems...

 

I have no problem with a ban on late-term "elective" abortion per se. The issue is that such laws are clearly a cynical attempt to chip away at reproductive rights; they don't stop there (see: imposing hospital-like requirements on clinics, requiring a waiting period, requiring parental consent for minors, 20-week limits, 15-week limits, allowing "crisis pregnancy centers" to exist and mislead women seeking genuine help and counsel, going after birth control and Plan B, and so on).

 

Pro-lifers in favor of birth control and Plan B and willing to sincerely compromise are not in control of the movement and not in control of the policy effects. I don't think there's any country (e.g., Ireland) where that's the case.

 

This this this.

 

What you're talking about then, Guy, are the laws that Europe has. Which is exactly what I'm for as well. Obviously if the mother's life or serious health are in danger, that should always be an exception.

As for whether late term abortions are blown out of proportion... Well my point, and that of the article I'd posted in the feminism thread, was that precisely because they are so rare and mostly in medical cases, having an official Democratic platform that says people in the party should be for them in any case is counterproductive. It makes the party seem extremist and disuades independents such as myself.

We may not be in charge of Republican pro-life policy, but then, we aren't Republicans. But I guarantee a good percentage of independents are pro-life and want to vote for Democrats, but don't understand the official platform stance of fighting any and all Viabiity Cutoff dates. And they do fight them, even 20 week ones, although that's later than the supposed paradise of Sweden allows them.


And yes, Anakinsfan is correct: I am very pro birth control. That would prevent the need for many abortions in the first place. I'm also pro free healthcare for expectant mothers so it's easier to carry to term, whether they raise the baby themselves or not.

Of course you did, as you are always very thoughtful. I was specifically talking about Dani's response, though.

 

Why should I care what "Europe" has? (The countries are actually not a monolith when it comes to abortion policies and are quite disparate with countries such as Ireland and Poland being extremely anti-abortion.) They allow religious "crisis pregnancy centers"? They force waiting periods and ultrasounds? Elected governments look for any way to legally force abortion providers to close? If one country has a model I want the U.S. to follow, then I would point to it. I have no problem with the U.S. doing its own thing if I think it's the best way. I'm not a liberal nor am I a Democrat, so I don't have the delusional belief that European countries-- including the Nordic states-- are anywhere near perfect just because they do some things better than the United States.

 

Well I don't assume you want that, because you're not a liberal or a Democrat. But most of those types lionize Europe and hold various countries there, especially Scandinavia, up as an example of what they want our country to be like. I'm well aware of the differences between countries. I've been to most of them.

 

@Zapdos is from the Scandinavian region and pretty loose from what I hear
What say you about abortions @Zapdos
Also, you traveled to our country once on a tourist trip. Surely your field of expertise on our abortion laws and differences is in your repertoire as well. Please respond in no less than 500 characters.

 

Well, I think what you see is that the people in charge of pushing the "pro-life" agenda reveal their hypocrisy when they pretend they want to reduce the number of abortions and then block access to birth control. I honestly don't think that the majority of "pro-life" politicians in Washington really give a **** about whether a baby dies or not. If they did, they'd do two things: increase access to birth control and create a health system that protects babies after they come out of the womb. For these reasons, and a few others, I feel like "pro-life" is a really absurd turn of phrase. A lot of "pro-life" politicians, for instance, just recently gutted public healthcare. How is that a "pro-life" stance?

But regardless you have to ask what exactly is the motivation for all these "pro-life" politicians if it isn't actually about the life of babies? It's what a lot of these policies have always been about: controlling women. It's in the best interest of a patriarchy to saddle the women with the kids. It's the reason the "American Dream" was fabricated. It's why birth control blew the patriarchy's mind. And it's why they're fighting abortion tooth and nail.

Again, I'm talking about the politicians and the people in charge of the national agenda. I gather that the woman down the street has different reasons entirely, most likely moral ones. But you see why it's hard for the pro-choice side to feel like they have any reason to negotiate with the "pro-life" crowd. It would be easier to come to a consensus if the "pro-life" leaders were really in the fight because of how they felt about abortion. But as it stands, the "pro-choice" crowd can make their arguments and their concessions and whatever they want to do and it isn't going to change a thing as long as those arguments and concessions revolve around abortion. That's not what this has ever been about for the leadership on the "pro-life" side.

 

And they're better in every measure, so why not aim for them?

 

I agree they are. And that part of it is their sensible limitations on abortion. I don't think waiting periods and limititations on viability are unreasonable, and neither does Sweden for instance. Yet the Democratic party does.

Stephen, as I've said, I have no love for the pro-life politicians for the most part. There are a few who have no problem with birth control and always exceptions to the rule. As a whole, though, I think they use many people's moral views as a means of tying them down. They pervert people's good intentions and use it for votes. It's disgusting.

My question remains, why is the Democratic platform so extreme when the general public's opinions are not? The issue for me isn't whether they can work with Republicans. It's them pushing away independents like me who feel looked down upon for holding what we see as reasonable opinions. Polling shows most people think some restrictions on abortion make sense, yet Democrats fight them tooth and nail, and thus make it hard for some independents to vote for them. This results in a worse country overall because Democrats lose votes over something most people wouldn't mind (reasonable viability dates, for instance). To me this is no different than politicians ignoring the general public's views on gun control.

 

Indiana abortion law (sighed by Mike Pence while he was governor) ruled unconstitutional by Appellate Court.