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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
Thu Aug 3, 2017, 01:12 PM Aug 2017

Democrats Willing to Fund Pro-Life Candidates to Win Back Congress [View all]

From the article:

After years of party polarization over abortion, Democrats may finally be taking steps toward welcoming more pro-life Christians into their ranks.............

Will the potential of luring voters who have avoided the party over the issue of abortion be worth the backlash from the Democratic base, including outspoken abortion-rights advocates?


To read more:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2017/august/democrats-no-litmus-test-abortion-prolife-candidates-2018.html

Is this part of the problem, or part of the solution? If the Democratic Party is willing to compromise on the abortion issue, what else is on the table, so to speak?
40 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
This will weaken one of the historic planks in the modern Democratic Party.
6 (15%)
This will demonstrate that womens' rights are not as important as winning elections.
25 (63%)
This will demonstrate that the Democratic Party is open to compromise on this issue.
3 (8%)
Other.
6 (15%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll
103 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
We need to recognize that not all districts are progressive. Blue_true Aug 2017 #1
My Congressman, a Democrat, was against the ACA and is a self-described "pro life" Democrat. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #3
Sounds like. Blue_true Aug 2017 #7
My Representative is Dan Lipinksi of the 3rd District in Illinois. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #10
Mine was Stupak who was prolife and voted for ACA Kaleva Aug 2017 #8
At least he was consistent in that. Mine is Lipinski of Illinois. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #11
Stupak also cosponsered legislation to normalize relatios with Cuba Kaleva Aug 2017 #15
Right-to-work? We could pick up lots of anti-union voters! delisen Aug 2017 #31
And all of this illustrates the problem. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #37
The single platform will be marijuana Not Ruth Aug 2017 #63
I dont care if someone is pro-life...as long as they are also pro-choice nt Fresh_Start Aug 2017 #2
Agreed. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #4
Well put! wryter2000 Aug 2017 #4
When it comes to my own personal decisions, I am pro-life. Blue_true Aug 2017 #19
Dem campaign chief vows no litmus test on abortion G_j Aug 2017 #6
True. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #9
good question.. G_j Aug 2017 #12
My own fear is that if one attempts to appeal to every voter, there will be no real platform. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #13
"The real obstacles, in my view, are suppression and gerrymandering. G_j Aug 2017 #14
We should consider the loss of the misogynist vote a badge of honor. Gravitycollapse Aug 2017 #16
So then more republicans get elected while nothing changes? John Barcell Aug 2017 #17
I will not sacrifice women's rights to win elections. Period. Gravitycollapse Aug 2017 #18
Elect. Blue_true Aug 2017 #22
I don't help elect someone unless I cast a vote for them. Gravitycollapse Aug 2017 #24
I hope all the Democrats that stayed home in the 2016 election think this way, too. JoeStuckInOH Aug 2017 #41
There's a difference between misogynists and an ideology steeped in misogyny John Barcell Aug 2017 #46
Anti-woman, hatred of women, seeking to control women & resrict their rights is not misogyny? uppityperson Aug 2017 #47
You're stereotyping and subsequently creating a strawman. John Barcell Aug 2017 #53
WE are talking about misogyny. It's not haphazard and neither a "dog whistle" nor "stereotyping" uppityperson Aug 2017 #67
They're common terms in political analysis for anybody who wants to have meaningful discussion John Barcell Aug 2017 #71
Pro-life gives that clump of cells the right to control the woman. It does marginalize women to not uppityperson Aug 2017 #74
Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2017 #93
If you follow an ideology that hates and marginalizes women, you're misogynist. Gravitycollapse Aug 2017 #49
k, good luck voting for nobody. John Barcell Aug 2017 #50
If their religious beliefs marginalize women then, yes, they are out. Gravitycollapse Aug 2017 #58
Either you don't vote, or you've proved my point. John Barcell Aug 2017 #68
I'm going to make this really easy for you by setting it out bit by bit. Gravitycollapse Aug 2017 #73
As my mom used to say, she hoped we'd never have an abortion but fought hard to keep the right uppityperson Aug 2017 #76
maybe the main religions should use a bit of logic and reason and actually question NRaleighLiberal Aug 2017 #61
Goal post change! uppityperson Aug 2017 #64
You wouldn't sacrifice woman's rights, if you read any of my post you'd understand that John Barcell Aug 2017 #45
"Nobody is going to roll back woman's rights in a democratic government. Not ever." Gravitycollapse Aug 2017 #48
you are either incredibly naive or intentionally obtuse NRaleighLiberal Aug 2017 #62
I forgot about all the bipartisan "defense of marriage" legislation John Barcell Aug 2017 #65
"Nobody is going to roll back woman's rights"??? Good Lord, do you not read the news? uppityperson Aug 2017 #70
Yes, that is exactly what I imply. John Barcell Aug 2017 #72
Like Bob Casey jr? uppityperson Aug 2017 #75
we are seeing daily things we never thought were possible under trump. NRaleighLiberal Aug 2017 #79
Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2017 #91
We have an 80%, no way contingent here. Blue_true Aug 2017 #21
Thanks for the right-wing talking points. Gravitycollapse Aug 2017 #26
Do you understand. Blue_true Aug 2017 #35
I would be more than happy to explain to them why they're wrong. Gravitycollapse Aug 2017 #38
Blacks and Hispanics vote heavily Democratic. Blue_true Aug 2017 #39
I'm supporting women's rights. What are you doing? Gravitycollapse Aug 2017 #40
I'd rather we focus on winning statehouses, so we can deal with the gerrymandering in 2020 Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #20
I agree that a majority of American support choice. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #25
We need to get better at framing. Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #28
And framing was the reason that people like the ACA while also hating "Obamacare". guillaumeb Aug 2017 #32
Agree 100%. Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #33
I think pro-life is such a compromised and "politically" misleading term that any candidate Johonny Aug 2017 #23
I agree that the term "pro-life" is very vague. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #27
I dont have anything against fetuses, either. Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #29
Agreed. It is not being "anti-fetus" to be in favor of being for a woman's freedom to choose. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #34
Any of the above? loyalsister Aug 2017 #30
True. The term is vague and it is easy to define it in many different ways. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #36
I don't see how you could be legitimately called anti-choice loyalsister Aug 2017 #42
I liked your response. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #43
The voting rights are vague loyalsister Aug 2017 #44
You should have included a choice like "This will demonstrate that control of Congress".... PoliticAverse Aug 2017 #51
He needed a line that says BainsBane Aug 2017 #55
It demonstrates to me BainsBane Aug 2017 #52
We've already lost a lot of focus on workers and income disparity... HopeAgain Aug 2017 #54
Oh, but plunging women and children into poverty BainsBane Aug 2017 #56
We do agree on some things Omaha Steve Aug 2017 #60
Nah, I'm definitely pro-death. hunter Aug 2017 #57
Other--All of the above southerncrone Aug 2017 #59
Do you want someone to have a chance on states like KS or WV.. Casprings Aug 2017 #66
Will you be pushing to primary Bob Casey? (PA-SEN) brooklynite Aug 2017 #69
Then he's pro-choice. Gravitycollapse Aug 2017 #77
You can be both pro-life and pro-choice. Whatever your personal or religious beliefs are, pnwmom Aug 2017 #81
You cannot be pro-choice and pro-life. Gravitycollapse Aug 2017 #84
No, they aren't. Joe Biden, Ted Kennedy, and many others pnwmom Aug 2017 #85
Like I said, pro-life is a political position. Gravitycollapse Aug 2017 #86
We should help the best Democrat available in each district Renew Deal Aug 2017 #78
You can be pro-life, like Joe Biden, as long as you are pro-choice, too. pnwmom Aug 2017 #80
My philosophy also. eom guillaumeb Aug 2017 #92
The key is always economic empowerment Tiggeroshii Aug 2017 #82
And access to services must accompany that empowerment. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #94
Thing is it is a domino affect Tiggeroshii Aug 2017 #98
I agree about economic empowerment being vital. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #99
The Biden that will clearly state that personal belief won't interfere with his vote, works. nt DoodAbides Aug 2017 #83
All this time of pronouncements that party critics needed a reason to vote FOR Democrats BainsBane Aug 2017 #87
To me, the primary reason to vote for Democrats is that they are the better of the two guillaumeb Aug 2017 #95
I am a pro-life Democrat. Willie Pep Aug 2017 #88
No, we do not need Democrats who would take away our basic human rights. DLevine Aug 2017 #89
Excellent points. guillaumeb Aug 2017 #96
I have specific circumstances for my vote on this Bradical79 Aug 2017 #101
Who else u want to sell out?? dembotoz Aug 2017 #90
Are you addressing me personally? guillaumeb Aug 2017 #97
I am sick and tired of let water down reproductive Rights dembotoz Aug 2017 #100
Ask not who we can sacrifice to win votes; ask instead delisen Aug 2017 #102
A nice rewording. eom guillaumeb Aug 2017 #103
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Democrats Willing to Fund...