Why be uncompromising on reproductive rights, but not peace/economic issues?

[DerekG]

No one here would be faulted for withholding his/her vote from an anti-choice candidate, no matter how laudable said candidate would otherwise be. And yet, over the years, I've seen countless posters dismissed or denigrated for opposing a Democrat who had taken a center-right position on any number of issues, ranging from gun rights to the dreaded TPP. What gives?

Why is the reproductive-rights position sacrosanct while, say, my refusal to support any politician who voted for the Iraq War Resolution controversial? Why isn't my outrage at a million dead Iraqis and 4500 American soldiers as respected?

[djean111]

1. Because the DNC/Third Way people are purists - their way or the highway.

That's why it is so funny when liberals are accused of being purists because they actually care about individual issues - we are supposed to embrace the purity of voting Dem no matter what.

[Agnosticsherbet]

2. Not every issue has the same priority. For me, reproductive rights are individual civil righs.

that are being systematicaly denied to groups of people. I don't compromise or negotiate.

War and TPP are National policy and policies are not as imporant as civil rights. I oppose reknewed conflict in Iraq, supported providing weapons to some of the Syrian rebels and the our action in libya.

Guns, the second amendment, is a curious bird. The right for everyone to have a gun without regulation and to the exclusion of all other rights is a modern concept and a bad one. It is within the law to place some reasonable limits on all of our rights, so the policy of unregualted gun rights is one I am opposed to. Regulation is a policy issue not a denial of one of our rights. Gun regulation is higher priority to me than foreign policy, so I would be more likley not to support a Democrat who opposed realistic regulaitons to make schools and the public space safer.

To sum up, I think it is normal to have things that are more important, that we are less likely to compromise about. Not everythng has to be a struggle to the bitter end. It is OK and human to disagree.

[DerekG]

5. How is war and peace less important than reproductive rights?

Even if Roe v. Wade was overturned, the women who would suffer and die would be a drop in the bucket compared to those who suffered and died in the ongoing Iraq horror.

At least a million Iraqi dead (to say nothing of the wounded, tortured and depleted uranium-poisoned).

3-4 million refugees.

4500 dead American soldiers (to say nothing of the wounded and homeless or suicidal).

[Agnosticsherbet]

17. No single nation or people can make the world be at peace.

We could tip toe through the world, and there will be war because conflict is a part of the human experience. It has always been a part of humanity, just as conlict is part of the Chimpanzee and Great Apes species, our relatives. We can through cooperation and a diligant rule of law reduce the damage and the impact of wars. World peace is a religous pipedream promised by some God when said God takes over and rules with an iron fist after the end of time. The identity of the God depends on the religion.

As a human, I prefer to act within the limits of human ability rather than wait for a diety to make it all a better.

As a nation, we can extend individual human rights to the geatest extent possible. That we can do. We can activly improve the lives of women, the LBGT community, and oter ethnic and natonal groups. We can make the lives of our freinds and neighbors better.

Ultimately we are finite beings with limited abilities. We each should choose those things that are most important to us. My energy will go to expanding individual human rights.

[bettyellen]

3. I am giving the side eye to anyone who puts their pocketbook before my right to control my body

women are jailed to incubate now, and forced to have babies against their wishes all the time - due to religious people undermining or eliminating basic health care in a lot of states. This is something that alters and limits the lives of many many American citizens right now- not in some dystopian future. It is urgent and real. They are forcing them to be scoped and look at embryos they do not want because of zealots, and being denied needed medicines. Of course that is more important than economic policy. How the fuck would it not be? We are half the country, and more reliable Dems than men are. Enough trying to get us to wait our turn till men fix what they feel like is more important to them. These are civil rights, and you ought to be with us 110%.

[DerekG]

7. Welfare reform didn't alter lives? NAFTA? The planned TPP?

n/t

[bettyellen]

11. as inalterably as a forced birth does? no. unwanted children are the most common route to poverty

in this country, it is a big reason for violence and murder of women too. Men do better financially only because they have choices and enhanced status only because employers do not see them as breeders first, workers second. That urgently needs to change.


Sorry- talking about economic issues without even considering all that reproduction skews the outcomes on such a huge scale in the USA is just incredibly tone deaf. And that is leaving out the basic issue that these medicines and care are life and death matters- and WTF i wrong with taking it deadly serious? It is literally a war on women these days. Sad you cannot see it, or tha your wallet is more important.

A progressive should know better.

[leftstreet]

4. Because it makes centrists feel like they actually stand for something

By the way, you may be hasty in assuming center-right cheerlea...supporters won't also compromise on reproductive rights

Just sayin

[bettyellen]

19. this contempt for womens' civil right is appalling, and NOT progressive at all.

[brentspeak]

23. Yeah, you're a genuine "progressive"

snarf

[Marrah_G]

6. I respect your position

[LeftyMom]

8. You've got it exactly wrong.

The people holding the line on women's rights are almost all of the same people arguing for a human rights framework on other issues. The people whittling away at the rights of women whenever it's convenient are the same people willing to tell anybody to shut up about anything until the next election (there's always one coming up.)

But thanks for telling women that we don't matter as much as your pet issues. I'll take that shit under advisement.

[DerekG]

13. Not in my experience

I can't count the number of times I've been told that I was contributing to a Roe v. Wade overturn by voting third-party. And I'm sick of it.

[Freddie]

16. Because you are

A vote for a third party, or sitting home, is the **exact same thing** as voting Republican as long as we have the current winner-take-all system.
And which party wants to take away women's rights?

[LeftyMom]

18. That's a specific strategic argument, whether or not you agree with it.

Feminism as understood by most feminists these days is intersectional, so issues of foreign policy, economics etc are important issues which benefit from being examined through a feminist lens.

Finding any inherent conflict between women's issues and peace activism, for example, requires a really outdated view of what feminism looks like.

[bettyellen]

20. well, if your "activism" is comprised of voting every two years, you would not know that most peace

activists are actually huge feminists as well. If you see feminists as the enemy, you need to get out more.
You could not be more wrong.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. Which is why I vote for/against policies and principles rather than party or politician. K&R

[WinkyDink]

10. Unless you can prove the "uncompromisers" are THE SAME PEOPLE doing the alleged "dismissing or

denigrating," then actually, all you want to do here is pick a fight.

[bettyellen]

12. because I have never posted in those shit show Snowden threads it PROVES I'm thrid wayer, LOL.

this is the idiotic belief of some people here. Seriously.

[joshcryer]

14. Finally, someone openly takes this position.

Basically, it's all theater. Apolitical commentators need crap to be outraged about, they don't get how the world works.

All social issues are economic.

[quinnox]

15. Because, to be blunt, some think their pet issues are more important than your pet issues

That is what it comes down to. "This is what's of top importance to me, so it better be of top importance to you too!" Or, "I think this, and you should think exactly the same!"

It's authoritarian thinking, and it sucks.

[JI7]

21. for me Reproductive Rights ARE about Economic Issues, they matter to me when it comes to things like

Jobs and other areas of the economy.

[JI7]

22. i would Fault someone who worked to Make Casey from Pennsylvania lose so some other anti choice

could get into office.

because Casey being Senator means another vote for Democratic control . even though i don't agree with him on that issue i know him being senator means things like Elizabeth Warren and other democrats get to chair committees.

it gives democrats more power over what will or will not come up for a vote.

Casey as Senator would not result in the same things having someone like Santorum as Senator would. it might be different if Democrats had a very large majority . but at least Casey isn't going to vote against pro choice judges and will mostly be a yes vote .