Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Abortion should NOT be rare. [View all]PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)72. the party platform was changed to clarify.
The concerns are about sex education and access to contraception. They are not and should not be confused with "abortion".
I share your concerns but when we mix it with the language that abortions should be rare, it places the procedure as a very different type of health care. One in which the goal is reduced use rather than expanded access and enhanced quality. And this has contributed to the significant decline in the number of locations where abortions are performed in the United States. The result is also fewer physicians - good physicians - who are even taught abortion care. Less than half of all OB/GYN's residency programs offer training in abortion care.
Saying it should be rare legitimizes efforts to restrict access to abortion.
Prior to 1989, laws interfering with a womans right to abortion were ruled unconstitutional. The shift in the composition of the Court under the Reagan and Bush I administrations led to the 1989 and 1992 Webster and Casey Supreme Court decisions establishing a threshold of undue burden for the constitutionality of state-based restrictions. Under this new legal regime, states can demonstrate a preference against abortion through the implementation of waiting periods, parental
involvement, mandatory information, and scripted provider speech requirements; since 1994, almost every state has done so. These laws vary in their construction and studying the effects of these laws is difficult but suggests that additional barriers to abortion disproportionately affect traditionally vulnerable populations.24 For example, the most severe waiting periods require two in-person visits to the clinic with a prescribed time between visits. In a world where many women lack paid sick leave and childcare, access to a provider in their community, and affordable transportation/lodging, a two-visit requirement may be insurmountable to some women.
Using this phrase is a linguistic trick of affirming the right to abortion while simultaneously devaluing it is both harmful and ineffective as a strategy to securing rights. The desire to help an individual woman achieve her reproductive desires by avoiding an abortion is a laudable goal, not because it reduces the need for abortion, but because it is what that woman wants for her life.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
160 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Nobody on DU is advocating for lots of abortions, and nobody is trying to prevent access.
NYC_SKP
Nov 2013
#1
I think the idea being conveyed is that we should have fewer unplanned pregnancies
DefenseLawyer
Nov 2013
#3
It really doesn't take a genius to wrap one's head around it, but people are being obtuse purposely
NoOneMan
Nov 2013
#24
If you're a right wing nut bag then was the entire Democratic party up until last year
Revanchist
Nov 2013
#34
Yep, and since we want other invasive procedures to be more common, we should want abortion to be
NoOneMan
Nov 2013
#65
Except that "common" and "complete access to them when needed" have completely different meanings.
Nye Bevan
Nov 2013
#11
The only shitstirring posts here are yours so far. Her body, Her choice. Deal with it.
idwiyo
Nov 2013
#111
Preventing pregnancy through birth control and education is cheaper and better for women than
Brickbat
Nov 2013
#10
And having lived in a country where abortion was not rare -- where the average woman had 3 by the
Brickbat
Nov 2013
#14
There are a whole lotta arguments based on things people never said regarding this subject
NoOneMan
Nov 2013
#25
I've linked to two academic papers on the topic, the national party changed the language
PeaceNikki
Nov 2013
#27
After all the strawman arguments and ad hominems, the divisive painting of pro-choicers as rabid...
NoOneMan
Nov 2013
#36
If YOU really believe in supporting a woman's right to choose, you will let HER decide what is best
idwiyo
Nov 2013
#116
Can you carry a conversation without switching to profanity the moment someone disagree with you?
idwiyo
Nov 2013
#114
I did not know that the Democratic Platform chose to remove the word rare from the platform...
whttevrr
Nov 2013
#82
For a woman who wants an abortion, it should never be rare for her to be allowed to get one -- she
Texasgal
Nov 2013
#57
Many medical procedures ideally should be rare. But ACCESS to them should not be.
pnwmom
Nov 2013
#105
I feel that the very implication that pro-choicers are referring to access is insulting and divisive
NoOneMan
Nov 2013
#101
Did you get a chance to find threads with DUers who want to restrict access to abortion?
NoOneMan
Nov 2013
#118
The focus on the word rare is wrong. Choosing to birth or not belongs to those who give birth, eom
freshwest
Nov 2013
#84
Then what's with all the talk about the word 'rare' in reference to choice? I've seen at least 3 OPs
freshwest
Nov 2013
#110
It may be a function of age. IIRC, it was Gore's saying. We knew in a liberated society, abortions
freshwest
Nov 2013
#119
And no Democrat/liberal etc who ever said abortions should be rare, meant it in that context.
phleshdef
Nov 2013
#95
In two posts you've essentially captured what I've been tripping over words for
NoOneMan
Nov 2013
#109
It Is NOBODY'S F*N BUSINESS... Therefore It Cannot Be Deemed Common, Nor Rare...
WillyT
Nov 2013
#104
Heh. I love when people announce, in the thread, that they're trashing the thread.
Sheldon Cooper
Nov 2013
#123
So - you really want unwanted pregnancies to be rare? Hey, me, too!! We should
PeaceNikki
Nov 2013
#125
If sexual education and contraception programs are working, then it most certainly should be "rare".
cleanhippie
Nov 2013
#128
Is THIS grammatically acceptable to you: "Unplanned pregnancies should be very uncommon"?
sir pball
Nov 2013
#129
*chuckles* I'm perfectly calm, I just don't like non-text replies that don't say much.
sir pball
Nov 2013
#138
Like I said, I also don't think it's INTENTIONALLY harmful, which is why I like to engage in the
PeaceNikki
Nov 2013
#141
WRT "fighting for access", one can both fight for a cure and still want to reduce the disease*.
sir pball
Nov 2013
#146
Like I said, it's not my slogan but I do agree with it when fully expressed.
sir pball
Nov 2013
#148
And I discuss it when expressed, even/especially when coming from a pro-choice supporter.
PeaceNikki
Nov 2013
#149
There is a difference between rare and something to be lauded or encouraged...
Decaffeinated
Nov 2013
#151
I think the real issue is that abortion never will be rare and never has been rare
gollygee
Nov 2013
#154