Do you agree with the Democratic Parties' stance on reproductive choice

[ThomWV]

Do you agree with the Democratic Parties' stance on reproductive choice as stated in the Platform of the Party? To refresh your memory:

"Choice

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.
The Democratic Party also strongly supports access to comprehensive affordable family planning services and age-appropriate sex education which empower people to make informed choices and live healthy lives. We also recognize that such health care and education help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions.

The Democratic Party also strongly supports a woman’s decision to have a child by ensuring access to and availability of programs for pre- and post-natal health care, parenting skills, income support, and caring adoption programs."

[Ken Burch]

1. I support it.

If only our Democratic Congress did. But they keep wimping out.

They don't even defend women who choose abortion from the demonization of the religious right.

We need to accept the fact that the antichoice types are always going to vote right-wing(except for the doomed-to-be-permanently-tiny "Seamless Garment" faction) and stop even trying to appease them. It just can't ever be worth our while. Only FEMINIST women will vote Democratic and people who are obsessed with banning abortion aren't winnable voters for us.

[RKP5637]

3. Exactly!!! "...stop even trying to appease them. It just can't ever be worth our while." n/t

[Oregone]

5. Its all cyclic

Im sure that the more abortion rights get impeded upon, there will be a larger body of women opposed to prohibiting this choice. These women will make up a voting block an opportunist politician will want to capture by defending abortion rights (yes...thats a tad cynical...but you gotta wonder if anyone cares beyond being elected)

[Tesha]

2. I support it. It's a shame so many "Democratic" politicians don't! (NT)

[Oregone]

4. What I don't understand...

People believe women should have a choice to do whatever they want with their bodies, or alternatively, they believe that the opposite of that choice will lead to worse consequences from unsafe facilities and terrible planning/education.

But, why do these same people not believe that anyone should have a choice to put drugs in their body or not, and that by not providing this legal choice will lead to worse consequences from bathtub poison drugs and blackmarket violence?

Yes...apples and oranges here. But...Im talking about a choice regarding one's body, and the consequences of prohibition (which are most assuredly worse than allowing such a choice).

[Donnachaidh]

11. pregnancy is far FAR different from wanting legalized drugs to use

But you know that.

I'm just amazed that you would equate that on the same level as choice - considering the FACT that women have died in the past, because they were NOT given the choice of controlling their bodies. Women's choice has been a WAR, with women being the victims.

Big frigging difference -- firing up a bud should not even be compared. It's almost offensive to see that being asked in this thread.

My opinion, of course. YMMV.

[Oregone]

12. Thank you Captain Obvious

Of course, but thats not what Im comparing.

Im comparing the choice to terminate pregnancy (and the negative consequences of illegal abortion) to the choice to take drugs (and the negative consequences of drug prohibition)

In both situations, people are making a *choice* of what to do with their bodies, and prohibiting legal avenues cause far more harm. The main difference between the two, in abstract form, is that with abortion, there is an arbitrary time period (determined by Roe vs Wade) when another person's rights must be considered (not the case with drugs, which remain illegal).


"considering the FACT that women have died in the past"

Oh yeah...and because people are not given a safe and legal avenue to take drugs, far, far, far more people have died.



"Women's choice has been a WAR, with women being the victims"

You haven't heard the term "drug war", eh?



Sorry...I find it hypocritical to defend *choice* in one scenario and not another...especially when so much harm is happening. People have their blinders on to do this.

Either you think people should be able to do what they want with their bodies, even if it offends your sensibilities, or you don't. Either you realize the public health concerns regarding prohibiting potentially risky/harmful behavior & operations, or you don't. Sending drug users to get poison from cartels is just as bad as sending women to the back alleys--and locking either of them up is never going to do a damn bit of good

[damntexdem]

6. Well, I agree with this stated stance, and with what's on paper.

But it's sure not the stance of all Dem pols.

[saracat]

7. And those should be voted out.Imagine if they voted that way in support of racial discrimination?

But somehow gender isn't seen as important as race.

[Ken Burch]

8. And, in the end, too many in THIS party still accept the right that angry religious MEN

do have the right to impose THEIR dogma on the rest of us.

They accept this out of cowardice, and they forget that it NEVER works to try to stop a right-wing political surge by acceding to parts of its demands. It didn't work with Truman and the loyalty oaths(all that did was to strengthen HUAC and the McCarthyites), it didn't work when LBJ started cutting funds to Great Society programs before they'd even had a chance to work(all that did was to give Ronald Reagan his big break in post-showbiz), it didn't work when Jerry Brown sold out to Howard Jarvis and the bitter old white folks in California on property taxes(all that did was guarantee that Reagan would be nominated in 1980 and Pete Wilson would beat Brown for the Senate in 1982 when any Dem in California should have been able to count on a landslide victory), and it didn't work when Bill Clinton told the poor to fuck off and die because he was too gutless to defend his own mother's story against Rush Limbaugh's smears on "welfare mothers"(all that did was to put the talk radio crowd into complete political dominance).

Why do our leaders NEVER get it that the only way to beat the right is to FIGHT them, and to do so with the same passion they use against us?

[saracat]

9. Because "Qui Bono" and the winning team rules the day. It is all about money

and the last election should have taught us that. Greed and money and power. The alleged base and the people are an afterthought. And it is only going to get worse. the handwriting was on the wall when Obama didn't take Public Funding in advance of the SCOTUS ruling. Things are going to get much much worse. Up is down and down is up. And remember, the "Left are F***ing retards" according to the COS, useful idiots who can be counted on for their vote especially the women. Remember FOCA? The promise on video yet to Planned Parenthood? It hasn't even gotten out of committee let alone voted on and apparently isn't likely to be.

[The Straight Story]

10. Pro-choice here - let adults choose, from abortion to where to drink to what to eat

Choice, it is not a one trick pony.