Democrats must support a women's right to choose. Period.

[Kaye_NY]

If you personally are pro life, and if you personally would not opt to have an abortion, that's fine.

But if you try to impose your personal view on abortion on any other woman other than yourself, you are not a Democrat, or a Democratic ally.

Women's rights are human rights, and this is non negotiable.

[Squinch]

1. And we ALL need to call Liz Warren and Chuck Schumer and tell them to cut this shit out.

They broke my heart with this nonsense.

[Demsrule86]

15. They broke my heart too especially Sen. Warren who I admire so much. nt.

[NobodyHere]

2. Are you content with a small tent party?

[Kaye_NY]

5. Women's rights are human rights,

No one is forcing anyone to have an abortion, but the minute you try to take away that right from other women, you are not a Democrat. It is not acceptable and it is not negotiable.

[NobodyHere]

6. So you are content with being a small tent party

Sorry but we don't have the luxury of having purity tests right now.

[Kaye_NY]

9. Sorry, but this is not negotiable.

This isn't a purity test. It's basic human rights.

[elleng]

11. I agree.

[boston bean]

23. What was it you agreed with?

[smirkymonkey]

39. +1000

[MontanaMama]

53. I'm with you Kaye_NY

I'm fearful of a party split over this. But, choice is MY line in the sand. Not negotiable. We will be sorry if we roll on this issue.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

31. We don't have the luxury of not supporting women's reproductive rights.

They are fundamental and must be unequivocally supported and protected.

[musette_sf]

45. The civil, human and Constitutional rights of HALF OF AMERICA

are NOT a "purity test".

[LanternWaste]

59. Standard platforms in a political party are not purity tests

Standard platforms in a political party are not purity tests any more than medical school is a purity test for doctors.

Sorry, we don't have the luxury of throwing three people overboard to save one.

[Warpy]

17. Are YOU

Sell out the most basic civil right of half the population and your tent gets really, really small.

Yes, it's that important. Imagine being told you've got to take months out of your life getting over an operation you don't want in order to donate a kidney to someone you don't know. That is the closest parallel I can find to reproductive slavery, not being in control of your own body.

[Squinch]

21. Yes, this "acceptance" is REALLY short sighted as well as being cruel to the party's most

loyal members.

Your analogy is good, except the results don't last a lifetime like forced parenthood does.

It's more like serfdom: some guy on the estate owns your body. He decides how you live, where you live, what you do. Your labor belongs to him for your entire life.

[MontanaMama]

54. Yes.

Yes and YES!!! There are enough of us to fill a yuuuuge tent. If we compromise on choice, women lose personally and economically forever. We won't get choice back.

[Squinch]

18. Are you content with a party that does not stand up for the right to people to own their own bodies?

[northoftheborder]

3. exactly my opinion

spoken plainly and well

[elleng]

4. However, CHOICE.

Top Democrats, Bernie Sanders Defend Anti-Abortion Members Of Their Party [View all]

From the article:

WASHINGTON ― Top Democratic leaders said Sunday that their party welcomes people who are pro-life, despite the party being strongly defined by its support for abortion rights.......

Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said it’s fine if an elected Democratic official personally opposes abortion, but from a policy standpoint, he or she must support a woman’s right to choose.........

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) went to Omaha last week to rally for Heath Mello, who is trying to unseat the city’s current GOP mayor. He said Sunday that he didn’t think the intraparty scuffle was that big of a deal.
“I have a 100 percent lifetime pro-choice voting record,” Sanders said on CBS’ “Face The Nation.”


So in the name of growing the Party, some Democrats are willing to accept that not every Democrat personally agrees with every position, but every Democrat should be willing to promote official Democratic platform policy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/democrats-pro-life_us_58fcd709e4b06b9cb917a7ee

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8987748

[Kaye_NY]

8. "Must support a women's right to choose". - Dick Durbin

This in non negotiable.

[riversedge]

13. I agree

[Squinch]

22. I don't think anyone here has any problem with someone who personally would not

have an abortion but who supports others' rights to choose. Endorsing those who do not support others' rights to choose is where the problem lies.

[elleng]

25. Right.

People having problem with line between choice and no choice, it appears.

[Squinch]

26. I don't understand your post. Choice is fine. An anti-abortion stance is not. Endorsing

someone with an anti-abortion stance is not.

[elleng]

30. Top Democrats, Bernie Sanders Defend Anti-Abortion Members Of Their Party.

From the article:

WASHINGTON ― Top Democratic leaders said Sunday that their party welcomes people who are pro-life, despite the party being strongly defined by its support for abortion rights.......

Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said it’s fine if an elected Democratic official personally opposes abortion, but from a policy standpoint, he or she must support a woman’s right to choose.........

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) went to Omaha last week to rally for Heath Mello, who is trying to unseat the city’s current GOP mayor. He said Sunday that he didn’t think the intraparty scuffle was that big of a deal.
“I have a 100 percent lifetime pro-choice voting record,” Sanders said on CBS’ “Face The Nation.”


So in the name of growing the Party, some Democrats are willing to accept that not every Democrat personally agrees with every position, but every Democrat should be willing to promote official Democratic platform policy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/democrats-pro-life_us_58fcd709e4b06b9cb917a7ee

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8987748

[Squinch]

32. Did you mean to repost the same thing as you posted before?

[elleng]

36. Yes

[angstlessk]

7. We are not the pro abortion party ...

we are the pro CHOICE party....CHOICE being the operative word!

[Starry Messenger]

12. k&r

I was just on a jury for this OP as a "personal attack." LOL.

[Demsrule86]

14. You are kidding?

How is this an attack?

[Starry Messenger]

16. No joke.

I voted against this being an attack. I'd be fascinated to know what the motivation was behind the alert as a personal attack. Or maybe not...

[asiliveandbreathe]

27. Yep - 2 - personal attack??? - LOL eom

[Kaye_NY]

62. Was there an explanation as to why?

[Starry Messenger]

65. No, they are just generic categories.

[mopinko]

19. they would have to be truly pro-life, including

being wholly and fully pro-life. anti-war, anti-death penalty, pro care for the poor and the sick.
you dont get to call yourself xtian if you cant recite the beatitudes.
like the late cardinal bernadin preached- a seamless garment of life.

we need to take back the idea of just who is the party of small govt. small govt does not police people's bodies and homes and families.

[lapucelle]

35. I'm tired of anti-abortion Republicans who are

pro-death penalty and think they are still entitled to frame their position as "pro-life", like the disgraceful Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas who had no problem scheduling and arranging the deaths of several men in quick succession so he could game the "use by" expiration date on the poisons he intends to have injected into their veins.

I am also tired of anti-abortion politicians who feign compassion by patting themselves on the back with rape and incest exceptions. It is a dead giveaway that the determining factor for them is not whether "all life is sacred" or whether "life begins at conception"; the crucial factor is whether or not the woman chose to have sex.

I'd like to see Democrats take the moral high ground away from the dissembling Republicans who pretend stand on it. Call them out on their inconsistencies, and make them own what they really mean.

[mopinko]

40. yup. no more fake xtians who never read the new testament.

would rather that religion be banished from the govt root and branch. but the least we can do is strip the cloak from these hypocrites.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

20. It's easier to compromise on this issue when you are a man, older/married woman. When you are

a young woman/girl and have a life that could be wrecked by an unwanted pregnancy it is a big, big, big deal. I knew plenty of women in college who had to have abortions. It was tough to do. I don't know anyone who took it flippantly. It was very accessible back then. Now I don't have the urgency and fear about this issue anymore but fair is fair. I had people who fought for this issue for me when I needed it and I cannot forget the women who are there now. I was in Jr. High School when the fight began. I didn't get it at first but it sure became important when I was 16-40. It had the potential to change my life. Back then it was not as much the political weapon/tool that it has turned into. The Republicans manipulated Evangelicals and many Catholics into fighting against it in large numbers. The Catholic Church was the main opposition to it in the beginning if I remember correctly. Now it's a whole different ballgame.

It's a big "eff you" and insult for ALL women for people to tell us that they have the right to "own" and control us.

[Kaye_NY]

49. It's an issue that affects many women's lives.

It's an issue that effects not only their quality of life, but their life in general.

It's a human rights issue and it's non negotiable.

[Eliot Rosewater]

28. Imagine if "these" type candidates werent FORCED on us in the first place!

Agenda?

Me thinks so.

[boston bean]

33. I am there with you.

[DURHAM D]

37. Indeed nt

[50 Shades Of Blue]

29. K & R!!!

[FiveGoodMen]

34. Who is it that is not doing so?

[whistler162]

38. Jawohl!

[democratisphere]

41. Agreed.

[tiredtoo]

42. worst kind of voter

A single issue voter.

[musette_sf]

44. The civil, human and Constitutional rights of HALF OF AMERICA

are NOT a "single issue".

[tiredtoo]

48. Duh! eom

[musette_sf]

58. So then, could you please clarify your OP?

What was the context you intended on "single issue voters"? Which "issue" did you have in mind with regard to those "worst kinds of voters"?

[tiredtoo]

60. single issue here is abortion

Personally, i am against abortion but would not take it upon myself to outlaw the practice. Abortion is a decision for the woman, her family, her doctor and her God.
Having said that i would not exclude a good Democratic candidate from getting my vote just because of their opinion on this issue.
We have Democratic officials are in favor or not against various issues just to avoid losing an election. Gun control comes to mind.

[musette_sf]

66. So your OP *was* referring to the sacred civil, human and Constitutional rights

of innocent female US citizens, i.e., HALF OF AMERICA, as a "single issue".

Looks like I need to say it AGAIN - the sacred civil, human and Constitutional rights of HALF OF AMERICA are NOT a "single issue", and women who vote to protect and defend those sacred rights are NOT "single issue voters".

If a Democratic candidate does not strongly and unambiguously support those sacred civil, human and Constitutional rights, s/he is NOT a "good Democratic candidate".

[tiredtoo]

67. Democrats Must support a woman's right to choose.

Says nothing about a woman's right to vote, a woman's right to equal pay, a woman's right to drink alcohol, a woman's right to play football. Just a single issue "A woman's right to choose".

[musette_sf]

68. Democrats must defend and protect the civil, human and Constitutional rights of ALL citizens,

PERIOD.

Any "Democrat" who violates this core precept is NOT a Democrat.

I demand that ALL Democrats defend and protect, for HALF OF AMERICA, the SAME 14th Amendment rights that each and every MALE citizen is endowed with at birth.

And anyone who thinks that the 14th Amendment rights of HALF OF AMERICA are a "single issue", is NOT a Democrat. The party platform is quite unambiguous about this.

[Kaye_NY]

50. Human rights are not a single issue.

There is nothing more important than the sanctity of Human Rights.

[tiredtoo]

61. Define human rights as posted in the OP

Do humans have a right to clean water?
Do humans have a right to vote?
Do humans have a right to healthcare?
Do humans have a right to free speech?
ad infinitum .

[Kaye_NY]

63. Women's rights are human rights.

Women's reproductive rights are human rights.

[IronLionZion]

43. Welcome to DU!

[zentrum]

46. I am more terrified of

....Repug victories and the effect of Repug policies on women than I am of anything else. I believe women will be terribly more harmed under any Repug than in any other way.

We'll have more traction against a pro-life Democrat than we ever will against any Repug. And the Democrat's other policies will make it easier to access health care in general.

This is a terrible choice, but this Mello election will also be seen as a Trump test-victory. Very damaging. Will embolden Trump even more. I can see the tweets now.

I'd rather bring caravans of women into Omaha to protect access to Planned Parenthood than to let the Repugs have their way with women and children there. Women in Omaha will be really abandoned if the Repug wins. We can still prevail but it will be more doable with a Dem at the top.

A Repug at the top is also a much bigger threat to all immigrant women and their families.

I'm a pro-choice woman, like Warren, and letting Mello go down will help no woman.

[Omaha Steve]

47. And when a candidate says I have changed and won't vote for restrictions anymore?

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

51. As I often say, If you don't believe in abortion,

then don't have one.

Otherwise, stick your nose into someone else's business.

I'm a woman, despite my screen name, although in my late 60s somewhat too old to have to worry about a personal abortion. Like any woman, I can envision circumstances in which I'd abort an unwanted/unplanned pregnancy, and others in which I would not. But those are MY choices, not anyone else's.

None of us is EVER in a position to judge someone else. Ever. Think of every possible circumstance (rape, incest, Down Syndrome, other genetic anomalies, and on and on.) and there are some who'd choose to have the baby, others who would choose not. Neither choice is morally superior to the other. I repeat: neither choice is morally superior. It is just a choice.

Oh, and what outrages me even more, is that those most opposed to choice are equally opposed to supporting unwanted/unplanned pregnancies, babies with various special needs, or even the simple support of a woman through her pregnancy. Hypocrisy, thy name is anti-choice.

[Kaye_NY]

64. Yes. It is a choice.

A choice that only the woman herself should make. Neither choice is morally superior to the other. Thank you.

[AgadorSparticus]

52. Absolutely NON NEGOTIABLE.

[aikoaiko]

55. I support a woman's right to choose.

[bettyellen]

56. Hell yes

[Skittles]

57. please stop saying "pro-life"

they are anything BUT "pro-life" - they are PRO-BIRTH, END OF STORY

[Squinch]

70. Pro-forced-birth

[herding cats]

69. I agree 100% with this.

If a person is anti-choice then I'm not interested, and our party should not be either. If they're anti-abortion on a personal level, but support an individual's right to choose, that's a different matter.

I couldn't trust an anti-choice politician, in either party, to not work to reduce women's right to choose. That's not what being a Democrat is about.