Bob Casey Tries To Close "God Gap." Dems Should Pay Attention

[JABBS]

Since the 2004 presidential election, in which voters who attend church weekly voted 2 to 1 for President Bush over Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), Democrats have sought to close what some call the "God gap."

Bob Casey Jr., increasingly looking like he will upset Sen. Rick Santorum to represent Pennsylvania, is one of several Democrats who are openly talking about "faith" and related issues. Consider him the poster child for closing the "gap."

Click here to read more on this topic, which will no doubt be important in the 2006 and 2008 elections.

[Warpy]

1. Clinton went to church every Sunday with a bible under his arm

Pandering to religious crazies is going to be seen as just that. Honest believers like Clinton were simply dismissed by crazies and will continue to be so. Their minds aren't just closed, they're nailed shut.

Casey is antichoice. That's the only thing that's giving him any street cred with the religious crazies. Does the Democratic Party want to sacrifice the most basic right of more than half its members, the right to determine what happens to their own bodies, in the name of political expedience?

If the answer is yes, then they have lost my vote forever. Men have no idea just how basic this right is to us. Cavalierly tossing it aside so that men can get elected is not the answer and will cost the party even more than selling the working class out has.

Think.

[JABBS]

3. there has to be room in the party

for anti-abortion types. otherwise, the party will shrink to less than 40% of the population, and the GOP will rule indefinitely.

a lot of what casey said made sense, IMHO.

[Sapere aude]

4. I disagree. The party will not shrink if we don't have anti abortion.

folks. It will shrink because we have turned our backs on women who are already party members. You can't fight the abortion battle in one party. It should not be something the government decides. It is a private issue between a woman and her doctor. Keep politicians hands off women's bodies. We will not grow the party by moving right. There is a greater number of greens out there that we should go after before we go after the religious right!

[JABBS]

5. there's a difference between

being against abortion and turning your back on women.

that's one of the points that Casey made, actually. and it's a point that clinton made in the 1990s.

the conservative noise machine and the religious conservative hypocrites try to make it that if you are pro-choice you are in favor of "abortion on demand" and abortion as a "lifestyle choice" and late-term abortions because a woman changes her mind about having a baby. they put up billboards with stillborn babies and suggest they were aborted babies. that sort of crap.

but the same people push to cut funding for women and children programs, and other social justice issues.

just because a minority of democrats are anti-abortion -- which would be the case regardless of whether casey wins -- doesn't mean the party platform will change. it just means the party tolerates a spectrum of ideas -- something the right has had trouble with.

[Sapere aude]

7. I do not think we should even have the debate in the party.

We most likely have both anti abortion and pro-choice dems in the party but I do not think we need to encourage either side. If we need to pick a side because the right pushes the anti abortion issue we need to be solidly pro-choice. Imagine a Congress that the majority is anti abortion because we have a lot of anti abortion dems in Congress. One anti abortion member is not much of a threat but as the numbers increase it then becomes a threat. I think we should pick pro choice candidates when ever possible.

[LostinVA]

18. There is a difference between being anti-abortion and anti-choice

Most people who say there are "anti abortion" are actually anti choice. There is ZERO room for discussion. ANYONE anti-choice is anti-women.

[JABBS]

51. that attitude

would make the Democrat Party a minority party forever, and then you'd be sure to get all the restrictions on abortion that you advocate against.

[Sugarcoated]

54. Democrat-IC Party.

We're not the DEMOCRAT party. We're the DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

Thanks. :hi:

[bobbolink]

6. And turning backs on poor is another one. So, just jetison all the

planks of the Dem's Platform, become just like the RW, and all will be fine.

It's just TOOOOOO HAAAAARD to be real leaders, and actually SPEAK to people about what the Dems stand for, and WHY.

Leadership is haaard werk.

[endarkenment]

8. Should we have room for other bigots as well?

How about anti-gay types? Plenty of votes there. Heck we could reclaim the old FDR coalition if we reeached back out to the anti-black vote. We could be the party of many bigotries. Lets just take away some rights from women, that's a fair compromise, right?

[JABBS]

9. it's not bigotry

to be against abortion.

[endarkenment]

20. Actually it is.

It is denying basic human rights to one class of humans: women. The basic right is the right to control one's own body. This is, to put it mildly, a fundamental right.

"To be against abortion" as in proposing legislation to make abortions illegal, is to be for denying fundamental rights to women. The rights of the fetus are acknowledged under the existing guidelines established under roe v wade. "To be against abortions" in this sense is to seek to remove those guidelines, to remove the well established balance between a woman's basic human rights and the rights of a fetus and is bigotry.

On the other hand to have a personal believe that abortion is an unfortunate and tragic form of birth control, one that perhaps violates your religious beliefs, is not bigotry. The bigotry part comes in when you want to impose your religous beliefs on others.

[JABBS]

22. but being anti-abortion

is not necessarily a "religious belief." there are people of all sorts or religions who favor abortion rights, and others who are against.

who is actually for abortions? who really believes in "abortion on demand" and abortion as a "lifestyle choice" and all the other canards tossed out by the Sean Hannitys of the world?

Roe v. Wade made abortion legal. If someone proposes that they want parental notification or spousal notification, I may not agree, but that's a far cry from saying that they want two sets of water fountains or think all gay people should be rounded up and quarantined in Nebraska.

[endarkenment]

25. And if they think that gays shouldn't be rounded up

but shouldn't be allowed to marry or adopt or have the same rights as you and me, why then that isn't bigotry either. Why not bring the antigay bigots into the tent too? Actually they are already here. Where is our triangulating DOMA hero Bill Clinton these days?

There are people of all sorts of religions who are full out in favor of denying fundamental rights to homosexuals so surely this is also not religious bigotry, despite the confusing fact that this bigotry and the anti-abortion bigotry are both almost invariably justified by citing various books supposedly written by some deity.

Heck if someone proposes that they want a return to separate but equal segregation laws, I may not agree, but that is a far cry from undoing the 13th amendment, so why the heck not?

p.s. I'm for abortions. I believe in abortions on demand. I support abortions as a lifestyle choice. I believe it is none of my goddamn business what you do with your body. The conflicting rights of the fetus were more than adequately addressed by roe v wade.

I cannot believe that we are having this discussion here on DU.

[JABBS]

29. me either

I can't believe that you are twisting my words so easily.

let's make it simple.

bigotry is wrong.

an opinion on whether one personally supports abortion rights is just that -- an opinion.

if one were to say that someone who wants to have an abortion should have to wear a giant A on her lapel, that would be bigotry. if someone suggested that anyone who had an abortion should not be allowed to have a job, or own a house, or vote, or marry, or raise children, that would be bigotry.

equating a history of violence and segregation against blacks, jews, gays, etc., to personally believing that abortion is wrong. it's apples and oranges.

[Warpy]

14. Do you really think we're only 40%?

Maybe that's part of your problem.

When questioned in a neutral manner, Americans have been prochoice by a sizeable majority. I think it's DOWN to 60+% these days.

Now do you REALLY think it's a good idea to alienate the party's women? It can't get elected without the working class (they stay home). Do you honestly think it can get elected without women?

Casey's lead has been dropping, remember. He's now in trouble.

[JABBS]

15. look at the numbers

http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

31% are ok with the status quo
20% want stricter limits
35% would allow abortion in cases of rape and incest, or to protect the life of the mother
11% say no abortion at all.

Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life survey conducted by Schulman, Ronca & Bucuvalas (SRBI). July 6-19, 2006. N=996 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.5. (Dec. 2005 and earlier conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International.)

A CBS News poll has similar numbers: 29% as is, 17% with greater restrictions, 47% for rape, incest or life of mother, 4% never.

So, it's not 60% that are pro-choice. It's 46% or 51%, from these two polls, and a portion of those would like to see more restrictions (probably parental or spousal notification).

Casey's lead, depending on the poll, is between 8 and 15 points over the past couple of months. He would have to be considered the favorite to defeat santorum.

[Warpy]

23. That's 11% who are antichoice in one poll

and 4% in another.

However, when you ask the mushy middle specific case scenarios (like a mother who is 11 years old, a severly deformed fets, a woman with cancer who will die along with the fetus if she goes to term, a college girl on scholarship who will have her whole future ruined, a mother of 6 who simply can't face or afford another child), those numbers change significantly.

Educated people don't want to go back to Casey's utopia of banned abortion. Nor do people who stop and think about what that would mean for sisters, wives, daughters.

They've been sold a bill of goods by men like Casey and the churches they go to that say women are all irresponsible creatures who get abortions every month for reasons of CONVENIENCE.

This is an evil viewpoint because it is such a lie.

Again, do you really think a party that can't get elected without its working class base can get elected if it sells women out, too?

Think.

[JABBS]

33. you aren't reading

you're pontificating.

in the pew poll 51% support abortion rights, but a portion want some restrictions.

in the CBS poll, 46% support abortion rights, but a portion want some restrictions.

At best, you're looking at a country divided. But if you only look at the subset of people who say they want the status quo on abortion rights, you're looking at a minority of Americans. Roughly three in 10.

I'm sorry, but just because you favor abortion rights and I favor abortion rights doesn't mean everyone favors abortion rights.

And adding in the percentage of Americans who would only allow abortions in extreme cases (rape, incest, life of mother) is hardly counting all the people favoring abortion rights.

[LostinVA]

17. No, there doesn't have to be room for anti-choice people in the Party

Just there there isn't room for racists, homophobics, and people with even MORE anti-women beliefs than being anti-choice. That's it. No compromise. I am frigging SICK of compromising with those wanting to take rights away.

And, I am also REALLY sick and tired of people and posters acting like being Christian and anti-choice go together... every Christian I know is pro choice -- even the Catholics in my family.

Ugh. It is at least 50 years past even discussing this.

[JABBS]

21. being racitst ...

or homophobic is not the same thing as being anti-abortion.

one is stereotyping a group of people for nothing other than who they are. the other is saying that an individual doesn't believe abortion is the answer to an unwanted pregnancy.

i'm pro-choice, but I think it'd be great if there were fewer abortions. in fact, during the 1990s, the pro-choice clinton/gore team nonetheless oversaw a dramatic drop in abortions, because they provided more education to women, birth control was available and encouraged, etc.

I agree with Casey that even if you are against abortion, that decision is not in a vacuum. you have to providing support for women, so that if they keep the baby they can have proper, insured hospital care, as well as proper medication/nourishment. you can't force a woman to have a baby and then keep her impoverished after the child is born.

no one is saying that being christian and anti-abortion go together. But the stats don't lie. for any number of reasons, more americans are against the status quo than are for it.

[Zhade]

31. Oh, they can FEEL that way.

But they will not be allowed to work to legislate that view, as it's a view that supports the unconstitutional control of women's bodies.

They're free to have opinions; they are not welcome to use the Democratic party to restrict rights. Period. No negotiation. NONE.

[RB TexLa]

26. It's actually all of it's members

the rights granted by the decision in Roe vs Henry Wade are applicable to people regardless of their gender. I have the same right to control and regulate my body as a female has.

[Warpy]

27. Thank you for pointing that out

because it's the truth and it's what protects you against medical treatment you don't want, like heroics for a cancer that's likely to kill you anyway and those heroics will ruin what life you have left.

But most guys don't think of that one.

[endarkenment]

30. Indeed. After all why not ban vasectomy on demand?

After all, each of those potential lives are potentially sacred. If the state can dictate women's reproductive rights, why not men's?

[Zhade]

32. THANK you.

It's actually a compatible argument against the War on (some) Drugs, too.

Great point.

[hyphenate]

2. Regardless

"in which voters who attend church weekly voted 2 to 1 for President Bush over Sen. John Kerry (D-MA)"

I would say that 75-80% of those "attending church" were likely hypocritical assholes like fundies and the other Pat Robertson fakes, so they have a very dim view of what real "Christianity" is and only are looking for someone to lead them into the "end times" and the other 25% were likely really stupid assholes who don't give a fuck about a lie as long as it's not about a blowjob. We've already got the number of most Bush voters, so anything they say or do is irrelevant, anyhow.

Real Christians would definitely know the difference between truth and lies, and while many of them probably didn't vote or did vote for Kerry, their erstwhile and dubious counterparts on the far religious right were in a frenzy to vote, to keep the godless liberals away from the white house. Even then, we know the vote was rigged in Ohio and in a few other states, so they really lost but would not have been capable of winning unless the fix was in.

[ComerPerro]

10. its still a step towards Theocracy by appeasing these dangerous freaks

[JABBS]

11. people who let religion guide

certain decisions, like abortion, are not by definition "religous freaks."

A little tolerance, people. Casey is not trying to appease the Pat Robertson crowd. It's the opposite -- he's saying that you can't be religious and then neglect the poor and the needy.

[ComerPerro]

12. Democrats aren't truly religous like Republicans. They just pander

get ready to hear that talking point every day of your life, if you want to try reaching out to the religious.

And, yes, people who let religion guide their decisions, ESPECIALLY their political decisions, are religious freaks and are EXTREMELY dangerous

[spoony]

28. So...

Despite my concern for the poor, the needy, the sick, the oppressed, etc. which is all wrapped up in my religion--and the reason I'm a Dem instead of a greedy-ass repug--I'm a dangerous religious freak. Nice to know.

[ComerPerro]

34. The second you start focing your religion on people, yes you are

and, even if what you say is true, you are in a very small minority of religious zealots.

[spoony]

36. Nonsense

First, you didn't say anything about "forcing views" originally. You said that just being guided by religious conviction made people crazy.

And no, I'm in no way in the minority, and I'm in no way a zealot. Most Christians, most Jews, most Muslims, etc. are normal reality-based individuals who honestly care about other people and the planet. I think you're so focused on the religious right that you're forgetting the religious middle and religious left.

[Sapphire Blue]

41. Welcome to DU, fellow "dangerous religious freak" ;)

:hi: :hi: :hi: Good to have you here, spoony! Keep walking the walk.

[spoony]

43. Hi, thanks :)

[dsc]

37. Yeah Jimmy Carter and MLK were such dangerous people

I am so glad neither one had any impact on this country, no wait they did and I am glad they did.

[ComerPerro]

38. you're right. you are absolutely right

lets bend over to the radical Christian right, because once upon a time there were good people who did things in the name of Jesus.

Lets just give up everything to the most prominent Christians out there, the ones who are demanding that we do so, because I'm sure that these people who have allied themselves with BushCo and the Republicans, have our best interests in mind.

So lets give up everything and let Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell have everything.

Its what MLK Jr would have wanted, right?

[dsc]

40. No but if it makes you feel better to distort what people say

go ahead. But here on planet reality, divorcing ourselves from religious people is assine.

[Ninja Jordan]

42. Who the hell is advocating THAT?

1. You have an anti-religious agenda

2. Stop distorting what people type

[endarkenment]

44. Bob Casey is advocating removing rights from women.

That is forcing his religous bigotry on other people through the heavy hand of the state. I object and want nothing to do with him or with the rest of the religously bigotted theocrats.

[Ninja Jordan]

45. Wrong

He has personal beliefs about abortion, but has never "forced" anything on you or me.

[endarkenment]

46. he hasn't succeeded in forcing his views

That doesn't mean he won't try.

"Many supporters of abortion rights — sometimes grudgingly, sometimes led more by their minds than by their hearts — are lining up behind Bob Casey Jr., a Democratic contender for the Senate who opposes abortion rights."
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/23/washington/23abort.html?ex=1303444800&en=80b9dd73dda4d863&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

"Barbara Hafer is a strong advocate for reproductive rights and was the frontrunner to take on extremist Republican incumbent Rick Santorum in the 2006 Pennsylvania Senate. She has just been forced out of the race by Democratic leaders and consultants in favor of an anti-abortion candidate they recruited.

Who did top Democrats pick to run against Santorum, one of the leading anti-abortion, anti-women's rights and anti-gay senators?

Top Democrats recruited Robert P. Casey Jr., a staunch abortion opponent in the mold of his father, the late Pennsylvania Governor Bob Casey Sr. You may recognize his name from the 1992 Supreme Court case of Casey v. Planned Parenthood, in which the senior Casey defended Pennsylvania's Abortion Control Act, which was so extreme that the Supreme Court struck it down."
http://www.nowpacs.org/alerts/democrats-letter-03-05.html

And finally Mr. Casey himself:

Roe v. Wade Should Be Overturned. (Dec 2005)
Right to Privacy means contraception, not unborn. (Dec 2005)
No embryonic stem cell research; adult research ok. (Jul 2005)
Exceptions to save life of mother, rape & incest. (Nov 2004)
Opposes public funding of abortion. (Nov 2004)
Supports state funding of contraceptive services. (Nov 2004)
Opposes Woman's Right to Abortion. (Nov 2004)
Opposes Tax-Funded Abortion. (Nov 2004)
Supports Legal Protection for Human Life from Conception. (Nov 2004)
http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Bob_Casey.htm

At least get your facts straight.

[Ninja Jordan]

47. I still don't see where Casey Jr. has "forced" anything on you

Because he personally believes Roe should be overturned, that means he's focring something on you? He personally opposes abortion, of course he thinks Roe should be overturned. However, he's repeatedly said that he will enforce the law as it stands. Get YOUR facts straight.

[endarkenment]

48. He doesn't just personally oppose abortions.

He is a politician running for office who advocates overturning Roe V Wade, opposes stem cell research, and otherwise advocates forcing his religious views on other people and in particular advocates removing some rights from women. These are not just his personal views. Unlike for example Senator Kerry who is opposed personally to abortion but who supports Roe v Wade, Casey's public agenda is to promote his bigotry on the rest of us.

[Ninja Jordan]

49. I see, so if he believes something + runs for office = oppression on you

nice liberal, open views there


gotcha

[endarkenment]

50. What?

Yes of course. Good grief. He openly advocates overturning Roe v Wade. He wants to ban abortions. This is his political position, what he wants our nation's laws and policies to be. I oppose those positions and find them to be intolerant and bigotted.

[JABBS]

52. so you'd prefer santorum

who not only advocates the same thing, but also is a moron on a hundred other issues?

that's the choice. you get casey, and maybe the Dems take back the Senate, or you get Santorum, and almost certainly the Republicans hold the Senate.

[endarkenment]

53. I'd prefer you didn't state my position for me.

I don't support Casey and I don't support Santorum. I prefer that Casey wins only because he organizes on the D side of the aisle, otherwise I have no use for him. Thankfully I do not live in Pennsylvania.

[jsamuel]

13. the god gap will not be closed that way, it was opened by megachurches

and it can only be closed by them

[Hubert Flottz]

16. I'll pray for fair election tabulation.

But I won't hold my breath.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

24. If a Christian or other religious voter...

can't look at the Democratic platform and proposed legislation and see that we are (generally) trying to do the kind of work Christ (and prophets like him) would have approved of, frankly they are too stupid to be voting Democratic. :shrug:

As for the dominant religious group, there seems to be two kinds of Christians these days: those who value, peace, social justice, equity, compassion, and those who are obsessed with buttsex and fetuses.

We just about have all the former, and the later can kiss this Dem's ass.

[bigtree]

35. not interested in their religion.

at least not in relation to our country's governance.

All we can do with groups like this is pander. The pandering has nothing to do with anything concrete for our party except for the votes they have to offer. That can't be all good.

[CarlVK]

39. There is nothing wrong with faith. EVERYTHING wrong with theocracy

That is the fine point on the issue that keeps getting ignored. The Democrats need to keep this distinction alive and in peoples' faces. It is crucial.

[Sugarcoated]

55. Very well put CarlVK.