Fri Aug 4, 2017, 11:00 AM
stevenleser (32,886 posts)
I'm not OK with running or funding anti-choice Dems. Pro choice but anti-abortion? Sure.
There is no reason to run an anti-choice Democrat.
Someone for whom abortion is against THEIR belief system, and notice I highlighted the "THEIR", can state that they are anti-abortion but pro-choice for those who don't believe as they do. It's that simple. AND they can say they support free birth control, sex education and various other empowering methods to reduce the opportunity for women to find themselves in the position of having to make that choice. Being anti-choice transcends being against abortion in terms of ones own personal beliefs. It means forcing those beliefs on other people.
|
6 replies, 1667 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
stevenleser | Aug 2017 | OP |
CincyDem | Aug 2017 | #1 | |
LeftInTX | Aug 2017 | #2 | |
leftstreet | Aug 2017 | #3 | |
stevenleser | Aug 2017 | #5 | |
Bad Thoughts | Aug 2017 | #4 | |
mopinko | Aug 2017 | #6 |
Response to stevenleser (Original post)
Fri Aug 4, 2017, 11:09 AM
CincyDem (5,311 posts)
1. Yep.
Being against abortion personally is a choice within the sphere of pro-choice. It's one of many choices and I'm ok with someone who is committed to enabling women to make their own choices - even if those choices are different than what the candidate would make for themselves. Personally, I don't think abortion is right or wrong...I think it just "is" and the decisions about it are intensely personal. I think, as Dems, we need to support candidates that support that intensely personal decision staying personal. |
Response to stevenleser (Original post)
Fri Aug 4, 2017, 11:11 AM
LeftInTX (21,746 posts)
2. I've got a book by George Lakoff
It is called "Don't Think of an Elephant". I think framing the issue and how it is worded is very important in parts of the country where voters tend to be anti-abortion. We can be pro-choice and big tent if the framing is correct. I think explaining the issues such as maternal mortality rate etc. Tying it into other issues such as women's health etc.
(Sorry, I'm not making much sense. My book is stashed away somewhere) |
Response to stevenleser (Original post)
Fri Aug 4, 2017, 11:11 AM
leftstreet (34,921 posts)
3. What kind of world are we living in
when a 'litmus' test for any candidate R or D is a drilling on what you would/wouldn't prefer to see women do with their bodies
Ugh. Jeebus no wonder half the country doesn't vote ![]() |
Response to leftstreet (Reply #3)
Fri Aug 4, 2017, 11:22 AM
stevenleser (32,886 posts)
5. That's the point of being pro-choice. You are against deciding for women what they should do
with their bodies.
|
Response to stevenleser (Original post)
Fri Aug 4, 2017, 11:15 AM
Bad Thoughts (2,484 posts)
4. Abortion is medicine
I could care less what politicians feel about abortion or its relationship to moral behavior, but it belongs entirely within the realm of medicine, and it is dangerous for them to meddle with it. It needs to be available to women who need it, and not constrained to specific places and environments that make it difficult for women to get the procedure.
|
Response to stevenleser (Original post)
Fri Aug 4, 2017, 11:46 AM
mopinko (66,414 posts)
6. i think the correct frame is- who decides.
do we want the government deciding for a woman and her family? would you be okay w the government deciding for YOU that you already have too many children, and must abort your pregnancy? no? well dont let the government decide for me, either.
|