General Discussion

Hekate

(90,556 posts)

27. The fact that we are having this fight at DU just now means someone is stirring the pot...

Tue Aug 1, 2017, 06:14 PM

Aug 2017

If I understand the explorations of the Party honchos, the issue is not whether an individual candidate is willing to have an abortion themselves, but whether or not they will support the continuation of Roe vs Wade and whether or not they will protect the legality of abortion across the US.

Seriously, where was Senator Ted Kennedy on the issue of abortion? He was a practicing, if flawed, Roman Catholic. As a Senator, he upheld the laws of secular society as he had sworn to do, and worked to expand those laws in the direction of compassion for all. I never heard him say a word against Roe. He was one of our best Democrats -- and a member of a Church that is against abortion.

Should we have shunned him? Primaried him? What?

I thought this issue had been settled by my Party. Individual conscience is an important thing, yet from the beginning our country has striven to balance that with the upholding of our system of secular and not religious laws.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

71 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can A Person Be Anti-Abortion And Completely Liberal On All Other Issues? [View all] ProudLib72 Aug 2017 OP

Why are women always expected to take one for the team? leftstreet Aug 2017 #1

+1 hamsterjill Aug 2017 #22

The fact that we are having this fight at DU just now means someone is stirring the pot... Hekate Aug 2017 #27

I see your point. hamsterjill Aug 2017 #40

Roe was decided in 1973 ChubbyStar Aug 2017 #53

Thanks. I edited my post to reflect the correct date. hamsterjill Aug 2017 #61

I am the worst phone typer in the world ChubbyStar Aug 2017 #64

I type about 100 wpm on a keyboard hamsterjill Aug 2017 #71

sigh. I am well aware of that, since I was 26 when Roe passed. Kennedy had a long, long career. Hekate Aug 2017 #68

Trolls everywhere with this bullshit elehhhhna Aug 2017 #51

Thanks for the clarification ChubbyStar Aug 2017 #60

Agreed. hamsterjill Aug 2017 #62

I am strongly anti-abortion AND strongly pro-choice. Binkie The Clown Aug 2017 #2

Agreed. Justice Aug 2017 #5

This ismnotwasm Aug 2017 #8

This. Skidmore Aug 2017 #11

Your headline is an oxymoron. brush Aug 2017 #16

Pro-choice is not mutually exclusive with anti-abortion. That's a false dichotomy, so no oxymoron. Binkie The Clown Aug 2017 #17

How is one anti-abortion without being anti-choice at least on some level? Major Nikon Aug 2017 #41

I also think open heart surgery should be avoided when ever possible. Binkie The Clown Aug 2017 #43

Regardless you are still attaching qualifiers to choice by your own logic Major Nikon Aug 2017 #46

An invasive procedure like abortion is very much more risky than proper use of contraceptives. Binkie The Clown Aug 2017 #48

Not necessarily Major Nikon Aug 2017 #50

Alright, let's get this straightened out ProudLib72 Aug 2017 #20

this LAS14 Aug 2017 #52

That is what I said and I got put down horribly. Doreen Aug 2017 #59

That doesn't surprise me at all. Look at the responses to my post. Binkie The Clown Aug 2017 #67

Perhaps ExciteBike66 Aug 2017 #3

As long as it's H2O Man Aug 2017 #4

Pro choice and anti abortion simultaneously? BBG Aug 2017 #6

Much like the famously quoted line about freedom of speech, freedom of choice can be so described: Zoonart Aug 2017 #10

Exactly BBG Aug 2017 #21

This Hekate Aug 2017 #28

Choice to abort is a constitutional right so opposition to it doesn't much matter Cicada Aug 2017 #7

Not exactly Major Nikon Aug 2017 #42

Thanks for educating me on that point Cicada Aug 2017 #66

You can't be anti-abortion and be rational. Girard442 Aug 2017 #9

First, I think it is damned well time to stop conflating 'pro-choice' with 'pro-abortion' hlthe2b Aug 2017 #12

You make a good point loyalsister Aug 2017 #29

It's called pro choice. boston bean Aug 2017 #33

Would you call those who reject avaiability EXCEPT under certain conditions? loyalsister Aug 2017 #36

That is not pro choice. . boston bean Aug 2017 #37

The only time it isn't technically prochoice is when they want FORCED continuation of pregnancy loyalsister Aug 2017 #39

I don't really see the problem with it Major Nikon Aug 2017 #45

the term is pro-choice, whatever that choice sans obstices that are placed only to shame or deter hlthe2b Aug 2017 #49

I have always described myself as pro-abortion Major Nikon Aug 2017 #54

In that sense (and as the RW loves to suggest) it would be "wishing to" create demand hlthe2b Aug 2017 #56

Their warped ideology guarantees demand by limiting BC and education Major Nikon Aug 2017 #65

If you have a choice, anti choice dem or republican, any republican. Eliot Rosewater Aug 2017 #13

But the anti-choicer has to support his/her constituents leftstreet Aug 2017 #14

That's the DCCC's view ProudLib72 Aug 2017 #18

Pro choice candidates cant win in some districts, best example is Eliot Rosewater Aug 2017 #19

Messaging. It's messaging ProudLib72 Aug 2017 #23

A person can be anti-abortion and pro-choice Fresh_Start Aug 2017 #15

A person can choose to never have an abortion out of personal belief, yet support Roe vs Wade... Hekate Aug 2017 #24

Yes. I was imagining someone who was anti-abortion in his/her personal beliefs ProudLib72 Aug 2017 #30

sorta like he is a really good guy except for the klan thing dembotoz Aug 2017 #25

+1 DLevine Aug 2017 #32

Of course they can. Being liberal on all issues and anti-abortion are not mutually exclusive. Lil Missy Aug 2017 #26

Many founders were pro-slavery and pro-human rights delisen Aug 2017 #31

Not sure I understand your point ProudLib72 Aug 2017 #35

I am supporting your assertion. delisen Aug 2017 #38

No. If a person can't grasp the humanity of half of humans, then something is seriously wong. Coventina Aug 2017 #34

Anybody can be personally opposed to abortion Downtown Hound Aug 2017 #44

Yes treestar Aug 2017 #47

A person can be anything on any issue. But a Democratic politician had best SUPPORT THE SECULAR LAW WinkyDink Aug 2017 #55

Yes. Snackshack Aug 2017 #57

I think so, sure renate Aug 2017 #58

Bob Casey often abstains when his vote will only hurt Democrats. Blue_true Aug 2017 #63

Can A Person Be Pro-Slavery And Completely Liberal On All Other Issues? TeamPooka Aug 2017 #69

Sure they can. They would just be reprehensible people. Ninsianna Aug 2017 #70