Will We Abandon Womens Rights in the Name of Progressive Politics?

[ehrnst]

The most disturbing thing to emerge from this week’s badly bungled Democratic “Unity Tour” staged by Vermont senator Bernie Sanders and new DNC head Tom Perez was the fact that the only thing on which the two men seemed to easily agree was that reproductive rights are not necessarily fundamental to progressive politics. This led to uproar and outrage among some precincts of the left, and eventually to mea culpas and “clarifications” from Sanders and Perez. But it is worth closely examining this fight over the importance of reproductive rights in the party because it is an argument that the Democrats seem to rehash over and over and over again.

To recap: On Wednesday, Sanders gave an interview in which he said that he “didn’t know” if Jon Ossoff, the Democrat who the day before had earned more than 48 percent of the primary vote in a longtime Republican House district in Georgia, was a progressive. It was an odd move for a powerful left-wing politician on a tour to rejuvenate Democratic politics to fire a shot of ambivalence at a Democratic candidate in any tight race, but it felt especially egregious given that Ossoff was now facing Karen Handel, a virulently anti-choice Republican who was forced to leave the Susan G. Komen Foundation in 2012 after trying to sever the organization’s ties with Planned Parenthood, and who actively supported voter-suppression efforts as Georgia’s secretary of State.

Sanders’s definition of what constitutes a progressive became even murkier when he suggested that the election of Heath Mello, who’s running for mayor of Omaha, Nebraska — and who as a state senator sponsored a 20-week abortion ban and mandatory ultrasounds for women seeking abortions — would represent a “shot across the board, that in a state like Nebraska a progressive Democrat can win.” Not to be outdone, Perez amplified the message that reproductive rights are negotiable for the Democratic Party. “If you demand fealty on every single issue,” Perez said, “then it’s a challenge. The Democratic Party platform acknowledges that we’re pro-choice, but there are communities, like some in Kansas, where people have a different position.”


Well, sure. There are also communities in Kansas where voters have different positions from Democrats on immigration reform, labor protections, climate change, voting rights, and health care, and it would be vexing — and not at all progressive — for post-2016 Democrats to alter their stances on any of those issues.

http://nymag.com/thecut/2017/04/bernie-sanders-and-tom-perez-must-not-abandon-womens-rights.html

[shenmue]

1. No compromise on women's rights

[Raster]

28. I AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY.

I am sick and tired of the endless personality and "purity" divisions and declarations on DU. FUCKING. SICK. OF. IT. I am so freakin' tired of these "lines in the sand."

HOWEVER, The line in the sand I will actively observe, the purity test I do believe in: NO COMPROMISE ON WOMEN'S RIGHTS. Absolutely NO COMPROMISE on a woman's right to choose and determine her own healthcare choices AND MOST IMPORTANTLY her reproductive freedom. From this there is no surrender. There is no negotiation. There is no compromise.

[BadgerMom]

51. No compromise

[hamsterjill]

33. +1000!!!!!!

NO compromise.

[Kentonio]

2. Were the first 3 threads you posted about this in the last 24 hours not adequate?

[fun n serious]

4. No.

It should be repeated frequently

[ehrnst]

5. I was unaware there was a limit. At least on posts concerning women's reproductive health care.

Does talk about ladyparts make you uncomfortable?

Although it's flattering that you are following me around DU.

[Kentonio]

7. Not in the slightest.

Then again these constant attempts to endlessly refight the primary by flooding the board with anti-Bernie threads don't make me uncomfortable either, just rather tired and disappointed that some Democrats can't see any more pressing issues in the country right now. Like for instance the party on the other side that would love nothing more than to crush women's rights to reproductive health care and set back decades of progressive hard work.

[ehrnst]

9. I suppose that basic healthcare access for women isn't very pressing for some.

As I see from so many " You see, it's not like it's an economic issue" posts here.

Rather tired and disappointed that some Democrats can't see that it's not simply a "social issue" or "identity politics" it's a health care issue.

And there is nothing more than the party on the other side would like to do than reduce it to a "morality" issue.

[Kentonio]

12. It's pressing to basically everyone in this party.

You're not exposing some huge flaw in half the party, you're trying to misrepresent a large number of extremely good people to make a point no-one disagrees with in the first place.

[ehrnst]

13. I never talked about "half the party." Perhaps you are confusing me with someone else?

[mercuryblues]

34. It's telling

that some believe the fight for women's rights and healthcare is Anti-Bernie.

[ehrnst]

43. I've noticed that. (nt)

[emulatorloo]

64. Twisting themselves into pretzles in a misguided attempt to "protect" Bernie

Bernie primary supporter here. Bernie's a tough guy. He can handle criticism.

I find this endorsement of Mello to be pretty problematic. Bernie's human so he makes mistakes.

However apparently some people appear to believe Bernie's infallible. So they have to scramble and change their positions because Bernie has spoken.

[ehrnst]

120. I understand tribal thinking, and the urge to protect

someone who you have fealty to, but there comes a time for critical thought, and not responding to clear, evidence based problems they have. Because as human beings, they're going to have them.

And that time is now.

[Vesper]

142. What is with the almost religious devotion to a politician?

Bernie made a mistake, he revealed some unpleasant aspects to his singular focus on his own talking points, he doesn't seem to care so much about the issues that affect people in very real and immediate ways.

The fight against anti-choice right wingers is very real and is something we cannot let up on, the sheer volume of bills and the sheer amount of money that goes into promoting attacks on women doesn't allow for relaxing our "rigidity" on this issue.

I'm appalled that people don't seem to get this, and the lame arguments they're trying to use to spin this into something other than the grievous error by Bernie. I saw the backlash against Planned Parenthood when they endorsed his opponent, I guess some people were always more about Bernie himself and less about the actual policies and organizations that do the progressive work.

Someone also said that we should only deal with abortion AFTER laws are passed. WTF? I guess they don't understand what kinds of laws these are that are being pushed and why they need to be fought every step of the way. Otherwise we end up with 20 week bans, suffering women and families and dead women. Oh, and laws on the books that say that it's justifiable homicide to murder doctors, and make a miscarriage a death penalty eligible crime. We already have a number of women in jail for miscarriage, but I guess since no one bothers to report on it or talk about it, it doesn't matter.

[ehrnst]

146. Sometimes there is a tribal element to loyalty

And criticism of a figure can be seen as a criticism of the group that identifies with that figure, even when it's not.

Fealty is another term.

[Vesper]

147. Tribal I get. It's the religiosity that's mystifying.

[niyad]

139. very telling indeed.

[moriah]

24. If you want to whinge about anti-Bernie threads...

... this one isn't the hill I'd die on.

Try the thread where Bernie was accused of defending Ann Coulter because he criticized people threatening violence to suppress speech they disagree with.

[brer cat]

37. How is talking about what Bernie said last week

refighting the primaries? You bring up the pressing issue that the party on the other side that would love to crust women's rights, but complain when we discuss that very same pressing issue when Bernie chooses to write it off as a distraction not worthy of his time or interest.

[Kentonio]

39. Which he didn't do.

But let's stop the games, this has nothing to do with sudden outrage at current events, it's nothing more than an ongoing campaign over the last few weeks to refight the primaries and flood this place with anti-Bernie stories. It didn't start with this story, and it's completely transparent.

[ehrnst]

42. Actually it is outrage at current events.

Is that clearer?

[brer cat]

59. You are entitled to your own denial.

Women's reproductive rights are not a f'ing game. When Bernie speaks that is a current event which is open for discussion. If you want to mischaracterize what he says, fine, but you can't impose that on other people.

[Kentonio]

66. Stop treating it like an f'ing game then.

The party has a long history of supporting candidates who are pro-life or fuzzy pro-choice. Be mad at the party for that strategy, or don't, but this selective outrage about one of our outreach leaders endorsing a Democrat (gosh!) is crazy.

[ehrnst]

71. I take it you have issues with the article?

Again, I would suggest that you contact the author, and explain to them why they are wrong.

[Kentonio]

78. Why?

You didn't just contact the author and explain how right you thought they were, you felt the need to come here and post yet another thread about it. That gives me the right to comment on it too.

[JTFrog]

89. You sound mad bro. nt

[Demsrule86]

111. maybe he ain't even mad though...hehehhe

[ehrnst]

103. Where have I heard that? (nt)

[Vesper]

148. But we're not the ones doing that.

I keep asking for proof of candidates who sponsored anti-choice legislation, including abortion bans. No one seems to be willing to provide them.

It's not selective outrage, it's the selective purity in service of a guy whose legislative history is being deliberately ignored.

I keep bringing up the 20 week ban he sponsored and the telemedicine killing bills, but people keep answering with spin about ultrasounds, which when you look at the bill doesn't match the talking points.


So, please. Document this long history of the party supporting candidates that have sponsored extremist right wing anti-choice bills and why the people who thought pragmatism was a dirty word and were proud of the purity, are excusing this impure endorsement of a small time mayoral race in which a documented right wing extremist is running with a D next to his name.

I'm mad at anyone supporting people with this type of legislative history after stating that we must not be rigid about supporting women's rights as he attacks a man for not adhering to his own rigid vocabulary.

[JTFrog]

67. This is happening RIGHT FUCKING NOW.

Your attempts to silence us WILL NOT WORK.

Send that message back to headquarters.

[Kentonio]

73. Ah yes

Someone disagrees with you, so it must be some big conspiracy! Oh no! The nasty forum poster wants to SILENCE US!

Pathetic.

[JTFrog]

76. Yet here you are as a shining example. nt

[Kentonio]

82. Let me ask you a question

Do you think that anyone who disagrees with you must be part of some horrid scheme to silence you and undermine the party?

[JTFrog]

84. You don't have to click these threads.

We aren't going to answer to or listen to you.

Though you are free to click and whine away.

[Kentonio]

86. We? You speak for the forum now do you?

[JTFrog]

87. You're gonna need a bigger boat.

[ehrnst]

99. Right over the head....

[ehrnst]

100. He speaks for me. That makes two. (nt)

[ehrnst]

97. You might well answer that yourself... (nt)

[ehrnst]

121. Do you think that anyone who points out issues with Bernie's stance on

the "flexibility" of supporting access to basic health care, for women anyway, is part of a horrid scheme to silence you and undermine Bernie?

[ehrnst]

101. Don't expect any self awareness on this.

[ehrnst]

96. Sort of like, "could you stop posting about this topic?"

Because ERMEGERD, there are like 4 "Literally identical" posts on Ivanka at the W20 in Berlin!!!

Get on those posts and explain to them that they are bothering you!!

[niyad]

138. these posts are in reference to something he said in the last week. this is NOT "refighting

the primaries"

THIS IS ABOUT WOMEN'S RIGHTS.

[ehrnst]

29. Have you considered writing directly to the authors of these articles

to enlighten them on what it is that they just don't get?

[Kentonio]

36. They're not all writing stories for the same publication

If a news site I read took up the habit of writing 4 different versions of the same story and flooding the front page with it, then I might well write and ask them to stop.

[ehrnst]

41. Because they are being shared in one place, that makes them "different versions of the same story"

gotcha.

[Kentonio]

55. You've literally started 4 different threads in 24 hours that are all the same thing!

[ehrnst]

58. Duplicate threads?

"Literally?" I had no idea.

Can you provide links?

And here I thought sharing different articles from different publications on a topic was allowed!

I'm so sorry to have burdened you with seeing those. It must be very trying having to see different posts on the same issue.

Have you seen the duplicate posts on "We have to stop the Bernie bashing and unite!" threads? That must have given you major headaches.

[emulatorloo]

75. Sorry, Democrats don't do the lockstep thing.

Bernie primary supporter here, but I find his endorsement of Mello problematic.

Bernie's perfectly capable of handling criticism. He doesn't need overeager folks to twist themselves into pretzles and smear their fellow DU'ers to "protect" him.

[Kentonio]

80. I'm not defending him on this. I hate the party's willingness to sell out our principles.

That doesn't make this endless flood of anti-Bernie threads any more reasonable though.

[emulatorloo]

92. yeah. I don't like the threads that dismiss the concerns of women fighting for choice either

by claiming they're trolls or "refighting the primary". They are just as bad as the over the top attacks on Bernie.

DU gets really crazy sometimes, it is definitely insane now. Why can't everybody just talk policy?

I think pretty much everyone here is solidly on the left and share the same core principles.

I honestly don't know why we're fighting all the time. It is starting to get pathological

It's the Republicans who want to take away choice. Not Dems.

You've made me think, there is no way I am going to post in any of these threads anymore. It is out of control and I think the best way to handle it is to let ALL of these threads sink.

[Kentonio]

95. I need to do that too.

I keep biting, and I know its just feeding into keeping them alive. Time to stop.

[emulatorloo]

98. ...

Thanks for the discussion and making me think about how we can work to stop this.

[ehrnst]

104. Indeed. (nt)

[ehrnst]

102. Sort of like the principles that we don't contradict science or medical consensus on an issue?

Like the one that access to abortion is public health issue, and not a mere "social issue?"

Like that one?

[JTFrog]

70. Tough. You have tools available to you to customize your experience here. Use them. nt

[niyad]

137. goddess forfend that something as basic, as serious, as women's rights, should get attention

in more than one thread.

[Starry Messenger]

150. How many posts did we get during the Primary telling us what YUGE feminist Bernie is?

We should get at least as many as those piece of shit threads.

[Kentonio]

158. I'm not posting any more in these threads

But just to remind you, the rules explicitly forbid refighting the primaries.

[Starry Messenger]

161. Thanks thread police.

Take your own advice.

[fun n serious]

3. I think we need to have this discussion on a national stage.

I think there may be some young women who would love to hear what it was like before RoevsWade and the fight we had to get it. I think it's important to remind everyone that republicans are in power and this issue is very much at stake.

[ehrnst]

6. Absolutely. And what it's like in states that have placed obstructions in the way of

abortion, against the strong objections of the medical community.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/teen-abortion-judicial-bypass-parental-notification

[fun n serious]

11. Stories like this one you posted were common

When I was a young woman, many still struggled and it was 20 years or better after RoeVsWade. I knew a young lady who was killed by her boyfriend after not being able to get an abortion in proper time. She tried.. but there was so much red tape still at that time. We have to remember too... Some women died just for getting pregnant.

[ehrnst]

14. Even after Roe - obstacles like "parental notification/consent" destroyed lives

http://supreme.findlaw.com/legal-commentary/using-a-baseball-bat-to-end-a-pregnancy-the-strange-michigan-case-and-the-questions-it-raises.html

and obstacles to affordable abortion providers, or the lack of nearby providers.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/03/back-alley-abortions_n_5065301.html

[fun n serious]

15. Also,

It required a referral from your physician.. some refused.

[ehrnst]

32. Kate Michelman, former president of NARAL, had to convince a board of male doctors

why she would be a bad mother if she continued the pregnancy she discovered after she left an abusive man.

[Orrex]

8. Women can have their own credit cards--isn't that enough?

If we surrender on women's rights and reproductive freedom, then we are no better than Republicans.

[ehrnst]

10. +1000 (nt)

[Cha]

17. lol

Yeah, we're not surrendering.

[mercuryblues]

40. yup

I remember when my parents got divorced. We lost the house because a woman could not hold a mortgage in her name. Even if she did earn enough money to pay for it. Now I know why my Mom fought over every little thing. To delay the divorce decree long enough for 3 of my older siblings to turn 18.

Women can have their own credit card and own their own home. Yet somehow they aren't smart enough to own their own bodies.

[Demsrule86]

154. Right...

[Cha]

16. NO WAY. NO HOW.

[mcar]

18. Women's rights are progressive

So hell, no!

[Gothmog]

19. Women rights are a central and key element in the Democratic Platform

I will not abandon the defense of these rights just to remake the party into the image of sanders

[Kaye_NY]

20. Absolutely not!

[BumRushDaShow]

21. K&R

Women's issues are not "wedge" issues.

[ananda]

22. No

..

[Ligyron]

23. I don't believe this is true:

" -and who as a state senator sponsored a 20-week abortion ban and mandatory ultrasounds for women seeking abortions"

I think he supported Drs telling the patient that an ultrasound was available if she wanted. Although why on earth anyone would want to see that before terminating a pregnancy is beyond me. Last chance to guilt someone about it I guess?

[TCJ70]

45. It's not accurate:

Many outlets inaccurately reported on what he actually put forth:

https://www.thenation.com/article/why-was-heath-mello-thrown-under-the-bus/

[ehrnst]

57. That is correct, however simply requiring physicians to offer it is also medically inappropriate

in part because it increases the cost of the abortion procedure to make that available to all women, even those who do not have a medical indication requiring that procedure.

That is a direct contradition to what the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has stated:

According to the ACOG, ultrasonography in pregnancy should be performed only when there is a valid medical indication. In 2009, the organization specifically stated, The use of either two-dimensional or three-dimensional ultrasonography only to view the fetus, obtain a picture of the fetus, or determine the fetal sex without a medical indication is inappropriate and contrary to responsible medical practice.

http://www.acog.org/~/media/Departments/LARC/TalkingPointsonUltrasoundMandates.pdf

The politicization of women's health is something that Democrats have long fought. To dismiss medical consensus on this is no different than dismissing the scientific consensus on climate change.

[TCJ70]

74. Just say "No, thank you" and move on.

Easy. An offer doesn't increase the cost of anything.

[ehrnst]

79. Not only does it increase the cost to make it available to everyone

even if they don't request it, it flies in the face of medical consensus. If a physician is giving a patient a medical (pill), rather than a surgical abortion in their office, they would not be able to do so unless they had an ultrasound in their office.

OB offices generally don't even have ultrasounds in their office, they refer patients to a facility dedicated to it. Is that clearer?

Again:

That is a direct contradition to what the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has stated:

According to the ACOG, ultrasonography in pregnancy should be performed only when there is a valid medical indication. In 2009, the organization specifically stated, The use of either two-dimensional or three-dimensional ultrasonography only to view the fetus, obtain a picture of the fetus, or determine the fetal sex without a medical indication is inappropriate and contrary to responsible medical practice.

http://www.acog.org/~/media/Departments/LARC/TalkingPointsonUltrasoundMandates.p

[TCJ70]

83. We were offered several ultrasounds when my wife was pregnant despite there being no...

...signs of anything abnormal about the pregnancy. Were those offers flying the face of medical consensus? Also, how does NOT performing an ultrasound increase the cost to patients?

[ehrnst]

91. Were those ultrasounds to be performed in the OB's office? Or were you referred to a specialist?

And if there was no medical indication for them, then yes, they were running counter to ACOG's memo - which was dated 2009. Just the same as if they were one of those shopping mall pop up 3d ultrasound boutiques. Nothing illegal, of course, but a nice moneymaker.

I'm curious, did you take them up on the offer, and were they covered under insurance?


I went to a dentist who immediately had patients get a 180 xray, because they needed to pay for the expensive new machine, and didn't tell people that they had the option for the old school, much less expensive xray that was fully covered under most insurance.

[TCJ70]

93. An OB is a specialist.

We did take them up on the offer and it was covered under insurance, as it should be for anyone receiving that type of service. I guess the ACOG's opinion doesn't carry much weight in regard to stopping all unnecessary offers of ultrasounds.

Now, back to the question at hand, how does NOT performing an ultrasound increase costs to patients?

[ehrnst]

112. An OB is not a fetal ultrasound specialist

in the way that a physician is not a mammogram technology specialist.

Is that clearer?

I was referred to an ultrasound specialist because of medical indications in my pregnancy, even though my OB did use an ultrasound herself when she determined the placement of the needle for the CVS biopsy. She showed me the screen when she did that, but wanted a specialist to look for specific issues.

My insurance didn't cover ultrasounds that were not medically indicated, however, I'm sure an OB who is looking to pay for a new machine might find a code that fit.

What year was this ultrasound?

Also, I never stated that "not performing an ultrasound on a patient increased costs." Requiring a gynecologist to offer an ultrasound requires that you have the equipment and staff available to any and everyone. It would be like requiring every single physicians' office to have a lab and technicians in their office to do bloodwork, when it may be more cost effective to share a between many on a floor, or send a patient to a walk in bloodwork lab. Is that clearer? NOT having a lab within the the office doesn't increase costs to patients, but requiring that they do will increase costs. Is that clearer?

For example if you are in a physicians office taking the abortion pill, that would require that they have an ultrasound in the office ready and available to offer, which would either prohibit them from providing that service, or increase the cost to cover the ultrasound machine they would not otherwise have. Is that clearer?


You can read that right here:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10028975353#post79

Is that clearer?

[ehrnst]

46. That would require the doctor to provide an ultrasound to all patients, which would raise the cost

of the procedure, when there was no medical indication that called for an ultrasound.

And it is intended to "educate the woman" that she is "terminating an unborn child" as if she was unaware of that when she came in for the procedure.

It's not only insulting but puts a financial obstacle in the way of women getting a timely abortion.

[Demsrule86]

157. Well it is true...and easy to look up.

Please note that Mello didn't just vote for it...he was a sponsor.

20-Week Abortion Ban

This bill bans abortion at 20 weeks post-fertilization except an abortion is permitted if it is necessary to avert death of the pregnant woman or to “avert serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function” or it is necessary to “preserve the life of an unborn child.”


1103 LB 1103
LEGISLATIVE BILL 1103
Approved by the Governor April 13, 2010
Introduced by Flood, 19; McCoy, 39; Langemeier, 23; Pirsch, 4; Fulton, 29;
Coash, 27; Krist, 10; Schilz, 47; Heidemann, 1; Utter, 33;
Stuthman, 22; Wallman, 30; Dubas, 34; Sullivan, 41; Fischer,
43; Janssen, 15; Price, 3; Harms, 48; Cornett, 45; Gay, 14;
Nordquist, 7;[font color="red" size="4" face"="face"]Mello[/font] 5; Lautenbaugh, 18.

http://www.legislature.ne.gov/FloorDocs/101/PDF/Slip/LB1103.pdf

[Orsino]

25. No, we'll do it in the name of party unity, I'm afraid.

Progressive politics will have to fall by the wayside in some races, and unfortunately too many of us lump women's rights under that umbrella.

[fleabiscuit]

26. Apparently there aren't enough registered democrats leading that tour, or enough women included.

Sup with that?

[ehrnst]

119. Yep, sausage fest. (nt)

[samnsara]

27. i want ALLL MEN to stay OUT of my reproductive rights!!! R AND D!!!

[Iggo]

53. Tough shit.

I'm going to fight for your rights whether you want me to or not.

[stonecutter357]

30. K&R!

[RelativelyJones]

31. Reproductive rights are non-negotiable. I don't care whether it is politically expedient in NE

or anywhere else. I don't care what your bishop, rabbi, imam or pastor thinks. No matter what you believe personally, you better be voting to preserve the right to choose. Otherwise, not interested.

[Roy Rolling]

35. Chew on this

I, personally, think abortion is a terrible form of birth control. But I totally support a woman's right to choose.

A party loyalty test only benefits Republicans, who think a party loyalty test is good policy. Do Democrats want to follow the lead of Republicans on this?

This is a personal medical issue, not a religious or political issue to be decided by someone else. Stop debating in those arenas under those rules.

[mercuryblues]

44. chew on this

women do not use abortion as birth control. Civil rights are not a loyalty test. Without control over our own bodies all other rights have no meaning.

[Iggo]

49. You were nicer about it than I was going to be.

[mercuryblues]

85. I wonder what

civil rights the people who are promoting party unity are willing to give up for the good of the party? pick one

American Disability act
Protects persons with disabilities from discrimination in many aspects of life, including employment, education, and access to public accommodations.

Age discrimination act
Prohibits discrimination on the basis of age in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.

Disaster relief and emergency assistance act
Provides for equitable and impartial relief operations, without discrimination on the grounds of race, color, religion, nationality, sex, age, or economic status.

Fair Housing Act
Prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of housing based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, and disability.

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972
Prohibits sex discrimination in education programs that receive federal funds, to increase educational and athletic opportunities for females in schools and colleges nationwide.

How about equal rights marriage?

more at

http://civilrights.findlaw.com/enforcing-your-civil-rights/civil-rights-laws.html

[ehrnst]

124. How easy it is to dismiss those as "social issues." (nt)

[Squinch]

151. No, seriously. Will you do an OP with this answer? Everyone needs to read it.

I have a feeling I'm going to be using it often in the next few months.

[athena]

72. Abortions save lives.

They save the lives of women. This is what we're talking about here. The lives of women -- i.e., a group of people who are not considered fully human by one of the two major political parties.

It's sickening that you propagate the right-wing idea that abortion is a form of birth control, as if we were not talking here about the death or enslavement of women.

[ehrnst]

122. Including the lives of tween and teen girls

A Polk Township 13-year-old girl performed a self-induced abortion using a pencil. During the process the girl became horribly sick, began having contractions, and ultimately delivered the baby at home.

http://www.care2.com/causes/13-year-old-performs-abortion-at-home-time-to-rethink-parental-notification-laws.html

[ehrnst]

94. Contraception and abortion are different things

You seem to think that women use abortion instead of contraception - is that what I am to understand?

And it is a public health issue, and contrary to what certain politicians say, is not merely a "social issue," to be lumped in with prayer in schools, nude beaches, or simply "believing that being gay is immoral."

Is the "Stop debating in those arenas under those rules" comment directed at me?

If so, can you clarify?

[retrowire]

38. Everyone has lost their fucking minds.

Bernie doesn't want to abandon women's rights or anyone's rights.

[NurseJackie]

48. I haven't "lost my fucking mind" ... I'm very clear-headed and rational and sane.

I can see exactly what's happening here, and I can see exactly who it is that's willing to negotiate and compromise on things that were once considered to be NON-NEGOTIABLE and for which there was NO-COMPROMISE.

38. Everyone has lost their fucking minds.

Don't try to tell ME that I'VE "lost my fucking mind"!!! What an insult!!

[retrowire]

50. OK Bernie or Busters.

Oops I'm sorry, it's quite similar.

It's just one local race, not the entire parties platform that's under attack.

Sorry for the sarcasm, I'm quite angry today. And a little annoyed that you ignored my pouring my heart out regarding our relationship the other day.

[NurseJackie]

63. Oh my god! Oh ... my ... fucking ... god!

It's just one local race, not the entire parties platform that's under attack.

No not the entire party's platform... just a very specific part.

And that's okay with you? WHY??

You're making excuses to ALLOW that type of exception coming from party "leadership"?? Really???

What other platform plank might you ALSO be willing to "compromise" on? LGBT equality, perhaps? (After all, if it's just "one local race" and just one issue, then "not the entire parties (sic) platform" would be under attack.

No, you're totally wrong. You couldn't be MORE wrong! We haven't "lost our fucking minds" (as you insultingly suggest) we're not insane, we're not irrational, we're not unreasonable.

[retrowire]

65. So the entire party's platform is still fine?

I was right then. Everyone's lost their fucking minds.

And you've still ignored my honesty regarding us. Good job.

[NurseJackie]

77. What does that even mean? Can you elaborate?

[retrowire]

88. The Democratic Party

As a whole.

Is still the party of women's rights and LGBTQ rights yes?

And if you were finally acknowledging our relationship then this:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8972625

See I was trying to make amends and you seem to have overlooked it.

[NurseJackie]

105. So which rights of mine are you willing to negotiate on?

Why do you believe it to be "insane" to vigorously fight to keep my rights?

Why do you believe that people have "lost their minds" if they refuse to compromise? I think all the continued references and accusations that people like me are mentally unhealthy (or mentally unstable) are a bit disturbing and insulting.

Our concerns are valid and our responses are entirely appropriate. What purpose does it serve for you to be so dismissive and insulting by (basically) calling us "crazy". Why is it that women are always accused of being irrational or crazy or insane or having "lost our minds"???

See I was trying to make amends and you seem to have overlooked it.

I have no idea what you're talking about. I'm not one to keep enemies lists or hold grudges with anonymous user names.

But, hey... thanks for explaining why my gesture of kindness to you was rudely snubbed... I guess your explanation makes written sense (even though I can't personally relate). It's all good, I'm not going to hold a grudge or hold it against you. By the end of summer, in my mind, it'll be "Retro-who?" and I'll have forgotten all about you again.

And if you were finally acknowledging our relationship then this:

I'm sorry, we don't have a "relationship" to "acknowledge". Honestly, until yesterday, I have no recollection of ever having any interaction with you.

That should give you some idea of exactly how unimportant old disagreements are to me. It's a realistic view of discussions and interactions on a political internet forum. It's a view and attitude that works well for me, and I recommend it to anyone who tends to take things too seriously.

[retrowire]

107. God damn.

You really don't care.

And that proves a lot.

I voted for Hillary despite the threat that she would never take some of my issues seriously.

Because Bernie lead me there. I'm not a single issue voter. I don't throw my arms in the air because something isn't perfect. That's what Bernie or Busters did.

The party is fine. Bernie's criticisms are just criticisms. He isn't signing executive orders.

Take note that I'm only posting this for public record and not a continuing discussion with you. I don't keep lists. I just remember people.

Take care.

[NurseJackie]

117. Okay, Goodbye.

107. God damn.
You really don't care.

I don't know you. You're an anonymous stranger on an internet discussion forum. I'm not going to hold a grudge because you snubbed a kind word from another stranger.

I'm not one of those persons who feels a need to establish a "connection" with everyone I meet, or with every one I reply to. I can offer a kind word of support to a complete stranger (such as yourself) but that doesn't necessarily mean that I'm going to let their personal problems (whatever they may be) have a negative effect on MY life.

I think it's unrealistic and a bit silly for anyone to expect that of me, or of anyone at all, for that matter.

And that proves a lot.

I don't know if it "proves" a lot of anything. But it does indicate that I'm a rational and clear-headed person who can keep things in perspective. I don't attach too much personal value to random interactions with strangers on the internet.

My entire life and sense of personal value does NOT hinge on this type of digital interaction. I also have a REAL LIFE in the REAL WORLD. I'm not obsessive. This is just an entertaining pastime that I take FAR less seriously than others.

I voted for Hillary despite the threat that she would never take some of my issues seriously.

That's nice. We certainly appreciate your selfless sacrifice.

Because Bernie lead me there. I'm not a single issue voter. I don't throw my arms in the air because something isn't perfect. That's what Bernie or Busters did.

I'm not sure exactly what this means or what you're trying to say, or where this is going.

The party is fine. Bernie's criticisms are just criticisms. He isn't signing executive orders.

As a party "leader" he should make it clear that our party's values and the equality of women and our rights are NOT NEGOTIABLE and NOT something to be bargained-away.

Take note that I'm only posting this for public record and not a continuing discussion with you. I don't keep lists. I just remember people.

Noted. You keep mental lists... got it!

Take care.

You too, gentle soul. Have a nice LIFE! Peace!

[ProfessorPlum]

61. LOL!

[George II]

114. What's so funny?

[Foamfollower]

152. It's odd.

It seems to me you have been following Nurse Jackie around to post "LOL!" in response to ehr poses in a few places ever since she "LOL!"ed at you in your thread?

It sorta creeps me out.

[m-lekktor]

60. They are blowing things waaaay out of proportion so they can go after Bernie. nt

[ehrnst]

123. If Bernie would simply call abortion a health care issue instead of a "social issue"

that would go a long way towards convincing people of that.

Saying those who point this out "have lost our fucking minds" will go a long way towards convincing people your opinion isn't a knee-jerk response to any critique of said politician.

[retrowire]

125. Is he calling it that?

Hmm I agree with you.

I'm not knee jerk. Just not wholly informed and frustrated.

[ehrnst]

131. Yes, for years

"But we can reform labor rights, raise wages, tax the rich their fair share, and regulate the banks — do all that and more — and STILL debate social issues such as abortion on the State level. And if ever a majority decided, could also reverse Roe v Wade. But why should so many remain so poor in the mean time?"
http://bud-meyers.blogspot.com/2015/09/bernie-sanders-delivers-at-liberty.html

"Once you get off of the social issues abortion, gay rights, guns and into the economic issues, there is a lot more agreement than the pundits understand." Bernie Sanders, July 9, 2015
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/weekend-with-bernie-sanders-20150709

“These are guys getting hung up on gay marriage issues,” Sanders told Schultz. “They’re getting hung up on abortion issues. And it is time we started focusing on the economic issues that bring us together: Defending Social Security, defending Medicare, making sure that Medicaid is not cut, that veterans’ programs are not cut.” Bernie Sanders 2013

ttp://www.rawstory.com/2013/10/bernie-sanders-tells-ed-schultz-southern-democrats-are-tired-of-being-abandoned-by-the-party/

[retrowire]

134. Thank you for this information.

Okay so he should reframe it.

But I'm not upset with him for his philosophy that economical issues should be corrected and then everything else can follow. Because what if that's true?

Is it easier to get women's rights figured out before the economic issue? Vice versa?

I don't think we can do them at the same time. What do you think?

(Look we're having a constructive conversation OMFG)

[Squinch]

153. No. But he just REALLY doesn't want to be inconvenienced by them.

[Iggo]

47. You got a mouse in your pocket?

What do you mean we?

[cheapdate]

52. I'll vote for a Democrat who doesn't 100% share my opinion on abortion

without any hesitation if it will help us take back some power from the lunatic Republicans and Tea Partiers who dominate this state and all the levers of power in Nashville.

[Nanjeanne]

54. Interesting article with Facts about Mello's stand

Unfortunately it won't matter to many here -- but it certainly matters to me.


https://www.thenation.com/article/why-was-heath-mello-thrown-under-the-bus/

Here’s the truth about Mello’s record: Back in 2009, he co-sponsored a bill requiring a physician performing an abortion to tell a woman that an ultrasound is available (as most already did). It neither mandated that the ultrasound be performed nor, if performed, that it actually be viewed by the woman—although it did require abortion providers to position the screen is such a way that the ultrasound was easily viewable.

All of these bills were opposed by Planned Parenthood—and, given the realities of Nebraska politics, all easily passed.

What’s more interesting is what happened next—and what didn’t. In 2012, Mello voted with Planned Parenthood on two out of three bills tracked by the group—and was excused from voting on the third. After that, Mello, who had become the influential chair of the state legislature’s Budget Committee, voted with Planned Parenthood 100 percent of the time. By 2015, the group was celebrating a “fourth straight year….without enacting any new abortion restrictions in Nebraska, thanks largely to committed women’s health advocates engaged in the legislative process.”

Like many of his supporters—including some of his most fervently pro-choice supporters—Mello told me that he would like abortion to be a private matter between a woman and her partner, or her conscience. So long as women’s rights are under threat, that can’t happen. But when I ask Mello if, when he says he “will not restrict women’s reproductive care,” that includes abortions, he doesn’t equivocate: “Of course. I thought that was obvious.”

[ProfessorPlum]

62. thank you

[ehrnst]

69. Hey there!!

Thanks for the kick!

[ehrnst]

68. I have replied to this same article above.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10028975353#post57

[Nanjeanne]

90. And if this discussion were about medical advocacy that would be great. Unfortunately the Mello

issue is not about that so what the AMA says about a sonogram isn't really relevant. Wish it were. But the argument against Mello is based on alternate facts not truths about his stance or vote record.

[Demsrule86]

106. I beg to differ...are you aware that Mello voted and sponsored anti-choice legislation...

He voted for a 20 week ban.

He voted for requiring a physician be present (right wing method used to close down abortion centers)

He voted for a denial of insurance for abortions.

That is not 'fake news'. It is in the Nebraska government voting record.
You can got to the link provided and click on the highlighted words in the except...it will take you to the actual vote records.

"Mello is a sponsor of the final version of a 20-week abortion ban approved by the governor in 2010, and cast anti-choice votes in favor of requiring physicians to be physically present for an abortion in order to impede access to telemedicine abortion care, and a law banning insurance plans in the state from covering abortions. He was endorsed in 2010 by anti-choice group Nebraska Right to Life."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/omaha-mayoral-candidate-under-fire-says-he-would-never-do-anything-to-restrict-access-to-reproductive-health-care_us_58f8e868e4b018a9ce590a84

[Nanjeanne]

126. Got it. Evolving on issues is only allowed

By Hillary Clinton and others as long as they aren't supported by Sanders.

Or the other Dems who have spoken out in support.

Got it! Thanks.

[ehrnst]

127. If only those who hated Hillary applied that same "hey, people evolve" standard... (nt)

[Nanjeanne]

129. Well you would have to speak to those Hillary hating people.

[ehrnst]

133. And you'd have to speak to those Democrats that you spoke of.

[ehrnst]

128. Tell that to those who dare vote against a single symbolic amendment that

Sanders supports, no matter how progressive a record they have, for they shall be called "Shills."

There is no dissent whatsoever tolerated by many here on issues that Sanders deems "universal."

[Nanjeanne]

130. I don't know those people you are referring to. Are they on twitter?

[ehrnst]

132. Oh, they were right on DU

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10028476684

[Nanjeanne]

143. lots of people right here on DU I disagree. Particularly lately. We just disagree with

Different people here on DU.

[ehrnst]

162. You asked where they were. I answered. (nt)

[ehrnst]

118. Actually it's ACOG, not the AMA, and since 2012, they have stated that

come out against ultrasounds that are not medically indicated as bad medical policy.

His record showed that he supported requiring doctors to offer ultrasounds to women when there was no medical indication.

Which part of that is an "alternate fact?"

ACOG position:
http://www.acog.org/~/media/Departments/LARC/TalkingPointsonUltrasoundMandates.pdf?dmc=1&ts=20130709T0142491575

Mello's positions on choice that go against ACOG's guidelines on abortion access:

Voted yes on prohibiting insurance coverage for abortion in 2011:
https://votesmart.org/bill/13254/34934/103098/prohibits-insurance-coverage-of-abortion#.WP9umogrIdU

Voted yes on Prohibiting abortions after 20 weeks in 2010:
https://votesmart.org/bill/11163/29878/103098/prohibiting-abortions-after-20-weeks-of-pregnancy#.WP9u1IgrIdU

Voted yes on government specified ultrasound procedures
https://votesmart.org/bill/9570/26024/103098/establishes-procedures-for-ultrasounds-performed-prior-to-abortions#.WP9wAYgrIdV

[get the red out]

56. Abandoning women's rights?

To do so isn't "progressive". Which non-white male rights would have to go after that to get a Democrat elected?

[Volstagg]

81. Women's rights ARE progressive rights

But supporting the Dem in an election is not throwing women's rights out the door? What should Sanders have done? NOT supported the Dem? Seems like you would then criticize him for that. There are dems that do not support abortion. If that is the case, should we then support the republican who will likely be WORSE on women's rights?

[KittyWampus]

108. Simple, stay out of it all together. His litmus test is economic issues

while he just proved willing to throw women's rights in the trash.

So better he just stay OUT OF IT.

And also stop insulting the Democratic party.

[lovemydogs]

115. agreed

I am a woman and a progressive.
Progressives have stood with women for over a 100 years.
Progressives have had some iconic women in their ranks like the original Mother Jones. Ida Turnbull.
Progressives believe in economic rights first because economic stability leads to gains for all people.

[ismnotwasm]

109. Feminists have the uncomfortable position

Of feeling a lot of "I told you so"--if not saying it.

All the arguments, here and elsewhere about patriarchy, rape culture, what it means to walk through life as a female-who in many instances is not regarded as fully human, especially when it comes to women of color. From the dismissing of terms such as "yellow fever" to the animalistic portrayals of the black female body.

To the disingenuous defense of certain words when used against women (I'm not talking censorship, I'm talking meaning) in the context of a hostile culture.

Arguments about what pornagraphy and prostitution mean, in terms of outcome--putting aside all bullshit "morality" arguments--these are situations that objectify the female body, and subjugate it to restricted economic agency.

We had warnings--4Chan, MRA's, white supremacists assholes--all that seemingly rotten structure in the backwash of the internet suddenly now has integral structure.

Has the female body ever had independent agency? Our rights have been under fire my entire life. It should come as no surprise that there are those who want to keep those rights as a salable bargaining chip. All things female are for sale in our culture.

[niyad]

140. would you post this as its own OP for visibility, and so we can rec it?

[ismnotwasm]

141. Sure

Thank you

[WinkyDink]

110. Men. Perhaps not the best judge or jury on this issue.

[lovemydogs]

113. Progressives are not anti woman

I have long been a progressive. I have agreed with and supported Bernie Sanders because I have thought many of the same things over the years.
I am a woman and have been a feminist before feminism became popular when I was a kid. My mother taught us girls to think independently and do for ourselves and that women are equal to men.
I have been a big backer of New Deal policies and ideas.
I have never agreed with or cared for the DLC/New Democrat Clintonism that has ruled the party for the last 25 - 30 years.
I always felt they were too republican leaning, too reliant on exclusive professionals while ignoring those on the ground experience and knowledge, experiencing things in the everyday. I felt Clintonism was too corporate friendly and backed privatizing over solid government workers who knew their stuff. I felt clintonism also pitted interest groups against one another as well as abandoning unions and working people.
I don't know how anyone can think Progressives are anti woman.
If its because we laud the tradition, a long tradition in the party, of being open to different ideas and to not demonize someone because they may not agree with me 100%. I try to learn and listen to other people.
Making the party an exclusive club who exclude anyone who may not follow lock step to 100% thinking is only copying the republicans.
Its what made the republicans crazy. They became a cult and not a party

[ismnotwasm]

116. What is "Clintonism"?--edit, never mind. I looked it up.

Charming.
I have not heard this term outside of a rhetorical device. Is this a thing?

[ehrnst]

135. I don't know how anyone could think that calling abortion a "social issue" is Progressive. (nt)

[niyad]

136. WOMEN'S RIGHTS ARE NON-NEGOTIABLE. PERIOD. and *** anybody who tries

to say, or act, otherwise.

[TheFrenchRazor]

144. as long as women let it happen, yes. nt

[ehrnst]

145. Women generally are not the ones "giving" their rights away

They are usually taken, as in the case of access to abortion and contraception.

If men in power determine we don't need those rights, often there isn't much one can do to prevent it.

Especially if the men who are supposed to be our allies view them as cards to be dealt away.

I've often heard that women "let rape happen." And we know how misguided that idea is.

[fleabiscuit]

149. BTW, we never did ever see any taxes did we. nt

[Fresh_Start]

155. how is a return to the 1940s a progressive vision?

Without all the social issues....the economic vision is crap for the majority of women, GLBT, POC, disabled, and immigrants.

I keep wondering WTH is wrong with the frail males...
animals are migrating due to changes in their environment
plants are moving north or to higher altitudes due to changes in their environment
women survived the loss of secretarial, stenographer, bank teller, shop assistant...and so many other changes in their environment...
POC have been fighting for a CHANCE to have equality for decades.....

but frail males need protection although they fought against helping any of the other groups? I realize that is not a fair description of is not all males especially not all males in DU or in my household.

They need to do some soul searching and grow a part.

[betsuni]

160. +1

[ehrnst]

163. I think we are seeing a left wing version of MAGA now.

And the same groups are calling it out.

[pecosbob]

156. Keep voting for neoliberal centrists and we will lose more of our civil rights

Predator corporations and their enablers are enemies of the people. Stop voting for the enablers.

[ehrnst]

164. Looks like our rights are "flexible" issues in the hands of some

neosocialist leftists.

That's not really much different than our rights being downgraded by those on the right, in the service of white straight men.

I'm not fooled by which side they claim to be on, and I won't support enablers.

Which 'neoliberal centrists' are you referring to?

[kentuck]

165. I don't think so.

I believe some issues will be taken off the back burner and will be put on the front burners with other issues that have pre-occupied Democrats for several elections.