It's hard to believe the right to have an abortion is threatened in the 21st century! I applaud the women in this article who run independent clinics that offer women access to abortions. This law was fought for with the actual blood of real women who died or were permanently disabled by illegal abortions. My personal belief is that men don't have a right to make or repeal laws regarding womens' bodies.Women have the right to decide what to do about an unwanted pregnancy. Perhaps if the right to life folks offered to adopt every unwanted baby, they would be taken more seriously.
14
Biology cannot support the religious belief that a human life exists upon conception. Neither can biology confirm what role God’s will has in life, that too is a religious concept. The demands to ban abortion are nothing else than attempts by religious people to change our country into one that follows religious doctrines. Whose religion would depend upon who has political control.
9
Progressives need to stop sanitizing abortion with phrases like it’s a women’s health care issue or it’s a women’s own body and she can do what she wants with it, or it’s not human. Abortion is infinitely more complicated and progressives need to stop treating the issue as if it is no different than extracting a bad tooth. It’s been said by the left that abortion is even good the economy. Whether one believes these are good talking points or not, they are non starters for a very controversial issue.
4
If Democrats were smart they would spend some time pointing out that their policies (affordable health care, education, contraception etc.) are the ones that reduce unwanted pregnancies and therefore abortions.
15
There is no such thing as a pro-abortion value or sentiment. Women controlling their bodies is not completely true--it is always mixed up a little with the nascent life inside. The law has a hard time with this.
This grey area has been exploited by anti-abortion crusaders. They use the words "pro-choice" to depict us as pro-abortion-- 100% interested in the mother and 0% in the child to be. Which is not true, but it sounds selfish.
As framing is so important, those who want to protect access to abortion need to supplement "pro-choice" with "protect women and children". We need to challenge right to life to live up to their beliefs---to provide universal care for children born to poor mothers, via programs. This will flip the issue back onto the right to life movement. They will be forced to define life more broadly than the fetus in the womb.
5
I see a divide in both parties. At least in so far as there are pro-choice 'right leaning' people and pro-life 'left leaning' people. I am and will always be pro-choice, but have conservative views on some things, such as immigration. We cannot place people in a red or blue box. Pro-life women that wanted to march after Trump was elected where shut down, as if one must support all policies on the 'left' or they are racist, xenophobic, misogynistic, and anti-gay. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
Georgia's law is wrong and will hopefully be shut down by the courts. But even some that support pro-choice believe that limits should be in place - if a baby can live outside the womb, it should not be killed. Pro-lifers would like to ban abortion all together. I agree that there should be limits after 24 weeks, but also fear that limits empower the pro-lifers to push the envelope. This is the same dilemma faced with gun reform. Many on the left would like no one to ever have a gun, period. For that reason, they've empowered the NRA and those that are gun enthusiasts to block reasonable legislation.
We'd like these issues to be black and white, but they are grey; complicated.
PS please stop with the 'gerrymandered' excuses and attacks on southern states. We all know that gerrymandering occurs in blue states too. Tired of the rhetoric.
3
Self-inflicted wound by Democratic policy-makers.
Only a small number of far-right zealots believe life begins at conception. A vast majority of Americans hold with the results of Roe v Wade, that the last trimester is protected, the first is not, and the rest lies somewhere in the middle.
But Democrats have refused to say that any abortion, at any point in the nine months should ever be illegal.
As a result, we're on the brink of a medieval concept controlling the lives of all women in red states. (That is, all poor or struggling women.)
Funny thing is, from all evidence people in the Middle Ages actually believed life begins with the 'quickening' of a pregnancy, well into the second trimester.
And now, the right calls us 'murderers' and we wonder why.
6
It strikes me as odd that people with a liberal bent will cite any number of presumed scientific positions when asserting the purely political notion about "climate change" in a bid for power. Yet when we discuss the politics of resolutely extinguishing gestating human life within a woman's womb - a life and a woman we certainly know nothing about in any true public or private way - no reference to the astonishing developments of science or medicine since 1973 can gain purchase upon those minds of partisans hardbitten to the core about how beneficial every abortion must be to both society at large and to the individuals involved in the abortion procedure specifically. The breathtaking scope of this unintelligent and vastly unappreciative partisan political assertion - for mere major party gender focused electioneering advantage, as it would seem to me - really requires curtailment from the other side. Further, it should be evident to every American by now that pro-Abort Democrats nurture a profound animus toward the demographics of the current American Voting Class - a hostility that results in not only targeting gestating future American citizens within our borders, while promoting open national borders, but a targeting of our U.S. Supreme Court as well as our federal election system which relies upon selection of delegates to an electoral college when we choose our U.S. Presidents. Can any notions about abortion be found to justify such impersonal, grasping politics?
Divided left? So there are those in the Democratic Party that support forcing women into producing babies?
End the division. Ignore the DNC and primary them out. We don’t need them.
2
Seems to me the biggest problem in this debate is that anti-abortionists have been allowed to manufacture a winning narrative and thus control the national conversation. Above all else, they have used these terms to secure and maintain the moral high ground. Two principle phrases have been key:
First, "abortion is murder" has been used with great success to effectively neutralize any and all questions about the procedure. It has been repeated so ferociously and so constantly that it is seldom questioned.
Second, "pro-abortion" has been allowed to supplant the more accurate "pro-choice." I know of absolutely zero people who are in favor of abortion - and yet good, honest, well-meaning Americans who oppose abortion use the term constantly.
In other words, if you are a vehement anti-abortionist, you have been permitted by our culture to label your opponents as pro-murder. No wonder the anti-abortionists are winning this debate.
Once this narrative was effectively established to slander the pro-choice argument, all sorts of folly ensued, like the so-called "heartbeat bill," passed in at least four states so far, and other laws which make a woman a felon if she has a miscarriage, or mandate the attempted re-implanting of an ectopic pregnancy (Ohio).
The greatest challenge for the pro-choice crowd is in PR; the conversation needs to be about the grotesque immorality of allowing so many unwanted pregnancies that abortion rights should even be an issue.
4
This is clearly an issue of complexity and intensity for all sides. It is life and death in many ways. Framing it strictly as a woman's health care choice is clearly disingenuous; it doesn't really pass the straight face test for many people, especially in light of modern ultrasound images. It's not a knee replacement or a tonsillectomy.
Other factors worth considering:
-role/rights of fetus (if any)
-role/rights of other biological parent (every baby conceived is half mom half dad). Neither should have 100% say in what happens
-societal focus on "third way", adoption etc.
-way better care for pregnant women, new parents etc so risk factors are diminished
The left simply saying men want to control women's bodies doesn't pass muster for most people. It simply isn't true. Few people care if someone gets a knee replacement.
4
Eliminating “rare” from the Democratic Party platform seemed to imply that they were encouraging more of them while literally celebrating in State legislatures when abortion right were further expanded to allowing a doctor and parent to leave a botched aborted baby to die unattended. Planned Parenthood selling body parts for profits. Hillary Clinton ,when asked, declared babies had no constitutional right to protection and her daughter claimed that abortion was good for economy. The most liberal abortion rights is history have brought us to this time in history and all (so-called) progressives have to do is look in the mirror to find the answer to why.
1
As a man i respect people's views on this issue. But I must admit to me it all comes down to the Woman's decision. When everyone walks away she's the one that lives on with this decision.
11
The use of the coat hanger was what was available when I started practicing medicine in 1956. It must be hard to understand what that meant and can mean again.
6
Women's personal morality is perhaps the abortion industry's biggest foe.
While the clients for abortions will always be there, not many women can work in such a morally-challenging environment without serious conflicts, and who can undergo that sort of stress for long?
Children are championed in our culture and especially on social media, and that trend is strong enough to continually reduce the number of people who can work towards ending the lives of these innocent kids.
The enforced dogma that insists these tiny people are something less than human beings was always something like a Soviet myth, and the U.S. is too educated a place for mythology.
If the entire abortion industry hadn't been founded on hatred for black people it might have had more chances to survive, but people were always going to find out what those people were really like.
3
I have to say I find it difficult to support the "right" to abort a child en utero for convenience only. A real liberal would favor all reasonable efforts to avoid it as well as ameliorate the effects of an unplanned pregnancy, including accountability of the father.
6
There is no battle to be won or lost. Laws have never and will never end abortion due to the fact that one's personal decisions over one's own body are still private--and probably will remain so unless fanatics require a tiny meter on every womb so they can spy on women. If the fanatics end legal abortion, the losers will be women who possess neither money nor power and who die in back alley abortions while the wealthy and influential will end pregnancies as they always have--whenever they please. Scorn for women runs deep nowadays especially if they are poor.
9
I think there is a much broader issue here than reproductive rights. I do not see how democracy can survive without people who are willing to compromise. The majority of human beings are moderate in their views on the majority of issues. Many of the people at the extremes (either extreme) on abortion would have no trouble seeing the need for compromise if we were discussing the economy or a great many other problems, yet this particular issue seems to offer no room for compromise. Over recent years (even before Trump) our country has become more and more polarized. I am old enough to remember when Democrats and Republicans could behave in a civil manner and work together for the common good. We need to return to that on all issues, including reproductive rights.
2
@Emma Fitzpatrick The media world had room for moderates coming up with ideas for compromise back when advertisers came here to reach customers.
The Google era has seen the news media world in fear for its survival, and many outlets have gone the CNN route, reducing themselves to simply reinforcing readers' personal prejudices.
But ideas for compromise don't work when the news coverage has to tell the angry on one end of the spectrum that they are always right.
The Times insists on using the politically charged "Left" and "Right," which drives me nuts at times. I certainly did not read all 480 comments, but when I saw Sandra's and L's, I became a bit hopeful.
Thanks to both of you for your thoughts, which sound as if they came from human beings instead of the all-inclusive "Left" or "Right." To L particularly, I ask your permission to use your quote "A woman's body is not public property. Keep abortion legal."
I strongly support a woman's right to choose and almost any other issue we face regarding such matters as the environment and health.
But I most certainly am a "Moderate" and would appreciate an effort by the Times to stop fueling the fires of political division by insisting that people simply are "for" or "against" something.
There can be many shades of gray in people's political philosophies.
3
In the interest of stimulating a more honest public debate about abortion in this country, the Times and other reputable news outlets should be collecting and disseminating information about political, entertainment and other celebrities who are publicly opposed to abortion, but who have had them or helped other people to obtain them.
4
I can think of a dozen or more medical reasons for late-term abortion - heart attack, kidney failure, eclampsia, pregnancy induced diabetes, etc... and a dozen more if the woman is a hemophiliac. But pro-choice theocrats would kill the woman.
As for "life" beginning at conception, it's a zygote with less life attributes than an amoeba, so proscribing abortion is just senseless. Unless you're talking about the "soul" which is a religious word for the mind, that is not yet formed in a zygote. That would be the "soul" that Christians, before they became totally nuts, claimed was inserted by "God" at quickening, the indication of an operative, if not fully formed, nervous system. Regardless, "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion".
Abortion is, and should remain, a matter of choice between a woman and, as needed, her health care provider.
8
The Left loses positions on culture-war policies like abortion because it thinks that it is enough to have the right answer, to be the smarter party. It thinks that SCOTUS decisions are cast in concrete, not written on the wind of words. Politics on the Left not only about being right, but also having the might to implement it.
The Democrats, for all that they like to be smart, are really quite stupid. They ignored the 2010 census. They ignored the states. They do not have a clue about the constitutional provisions which control elections and votes and appointments and laws. They badly need a class in Government 101.
3
This issue gets to the biggest and most disagreed notion of our time, liberty. Can people be trusted to do the right thing without getting permission from whole communities about how they live their lives? Freedom of choice is about liberty. “Pro-life” is about the community holding people to the community’s decisions about what all people do in life.
The separation of church and state is the principle that individuals have the right to live according to their consciences, rather than a community’s beliefs. That is religious freedom, the freedom to live according to one’s conscience. The laws of the state are to provide a civil society not to affirm religious doctrines.
Abortion is a termination of a pregnancy, not a sanctioned practice of infanticide. It’s based upon the old observation that while babies begin to come into being with conception, they are not babies until near the end of their development near birth when they can survive outside the womb. Like all other living things, an abundance of failed attempts occur for every successful birth of people throughout history. The “pro-life” people basically assert that God determines who lives and who dies, developing zygote, fetus, baby, or mother and people have no right to intervene in that process. In our civil society, we believe that people must do what they can to make their lives best.
6
If we focused on equality instead of abortion, we'd build a larger coalition. The government doesn't dictate what men do with their bodies; the government doesn't dictate what women do with their bodies. Period. Simple. Equal.
It's all about framing and branding an issue which Democrats are woefully inadequate. Abortion is negative; equality is positive. For a "big tent" approach, someone make a bumper sticker that says, "Pro-choice / Anti-abortion".
2
Deep down an moral abyss: fundamentally opposites imagining what the just knowledge should be ...and implementing by all political means.
Not that different over here:Europe.
Abortion is not a question of Left and Right. It is a question of Rights.
1
It’s more complicated......it’s a question of taking an innocent human (infant no less)
life. Where does one draw the line.
4
Over the decades the Democrats have continued to push further to the left on abortion. Within the last year or so they have moved so far left on the issue that it is made it easy for those on the fence and pro lifers to attack it and gain traction.
12
It’s Republicans who have and are trying to end legal abortions, including medical procedures needed to save lives. It’s their move towards introducing religious doctrines into our laws that has changed since the 1970’s, not Democrats. Democrats only then and now asserted that the individuals and their physicians should make the decisions about having abortions.
8
@JAC
How have Democrats moved to far left? How about offering a few facts to support your claim.
8
As a 70 year old man, I have either personally known or socially met many women who had abortions when they were in their twenties or early thirties. All their pregnancies were accidental. The women all said the same thing: they weren't emotionally or psychologically mature enough or financially stable enough to bring a children into the world at that time. Being a single mother would have been an impossible situation for them to be in. Most of these women said they eventually married and started families. When and if a woman is forced to give birth against her will, her adult life will become a hardship and probably ruined, and the life of that child will most likely be a very difficult, awkward journey. This may sound old-fashioned but it's not: A single young woman with a baby/child from an accidental pregnancy will usually have a difficult time finding the right male partner to marry or co-habit with. A woman who becomes pregnant should be the only one who has the individual right and moral authority to make the choice to decide if and when she should give birth. Tina from Central Florida, in her comment below, stated it best when she said below: "Are we sovereign or are we chattel?"
10
I am a more-liberal-than-average conservative in a very, very conservative, rural area of a liberal state and the abortion conversation has become divisive, even among friends. I am pro-choice only because I do not believe the government should tell anyone what to do with their body, but believe abortion should have limits--late term abortions honestly horrify me, and I know the somewhat recent legislation in some states permitting late term abortions was the tipping point for many people in my area to become not just sort of against abortion or moderately pro-life but vehemently, loudly, forcefully pro-life.
I am frustrated that it has become such a big part of politics because this, for many, is a hill they are absolutely willing to die on and it makes it hard to have nuanced, productive conversations about politics in my part of the world.
However, I also find it maddening that for many, pro-life actually means pro-birth, without any thought to what happens to the babies afterwards, and how best we can support the mothers before, during, and after the birth process. Adoptions can be cost-prohibitive, and the foster-to-adopt system is flawed and has a stigma attached to it in many places. I have three children of my own, including a newborn, and pregnancy, birth, and recovery are hard even when you have support and the means to pay for it all.
It's so complicated, and such a big, divisive issue, and I naively wish it weren't so because it creates such a divide.
5
Every candidate needs to run the campaign that is appropriate for their own district. In 2018, the moderates did much better than the progressives, for that reason. When a moderate says abortion should be safe, affordable and rare, those of us who disagree must exercise a bit of restraint. We all agree that every woman should have the right to get an abortion. It would make sense for local abortion providers like the West Alabama Women's Center to be on ActBlue. Are they? Yes, I do realize that some of the local providers described here are for-profit businesses. From the perspective of local providers, it makes sense to let national groups like Planned Parenthood fight the toughest and most controversial battles--and Planned Parenthood, whom we have donated to, should do so. As noted here, all of the costs of getting an abortion must be addressed. Otherwise, poor women, working women, young women and desperate women will still be unable to obtain abortions. The broad context is unavoidable. This is about the rights of women. The Republicans want to take away those rights. Next will be contraceptives and work-related rights. Extremists like Pence, Pompeo and Barr are publicly arguing right now for a government that is run according to the tenets of their own extremist wing of Christianity. A core group within the Republican party (the white supremacists and white nationalists) explicitly say that women should be barefoot and pregnant.
6
It is a private medical decision. Full stop.
14
So if someone wants to abort their child as they're going into labor after 9 months of gestation that's a private medical decision? You know the old saying, a conclusion is what you reach when you stop thinking. Full stop.
4
I would like to discuss gun control, Bush’s disastrous war in Iraq, environment and climate change with conservative Republicans but the Democrats make that very difficult with their present position on abortion. Truth is, Democrat party position on abortion has resulted in a greater loss of human life than the disasters resulting from Republican policies.
This article illustrates the divides in the pro-choice movement that a lot of us abortion providers have been experiencing first hand.
The ultra-liberal rhetoric coming from political groups hurts those of us in more conservative areas. “Shout your abortion” just doesn’t work here. Nor does “abortion on demand, with no restrictions.” A lot of pro-choice people would not be ok with abortion in the third trimester for non-medical reasons. They are horrified that abortion being “safe, legal, and rare” is no longer endorsed by the Democratic Party. Abortion is a complex, moral issue for many.
Why is the abortion rights proponents losing? We are doing it to ourselves with increasingly more divisive, more extreme rhetoric that alienates more and more people. The big tent is what we need, not to make abortion even more of a wedge issue in American politics.
150
Actually, those of us who want access to 3rd term abortions DO want it to be safe, legal, and rare. The writers here are using the same tactics as those who fabricated "the mommy wars."
33
@Sandra , it is truly insane how the Democratic Party and its aligned media have not seemed to learn any lessons from Hillary's loss in 2016. There was seemingly a brief period of potential reflection and possibility of reform but instead the Democrats ultimately decided to double-down on the very trends that led them to lose in 2016.
18
@Sandra Your insight that "We are doing it to ourselves" resonates with so many of the providers and activists we spoke with.
26
The Democrats alienate lots middle of the road people like myself with their litmus test on abortion. Want Trump to win another term? Then keep up the current rhetoric. I would have preferred to vote for Hillary in the last presidential election, but could not when the Democrats dropped “safe, legal and rare”.
3
The decline in reproductive rights in the US is usually portrayed as the product of a devious right-wing conspiracy. Tales of voter repression, gerrymandering, etc. feed this narrative. I applaud the brave tone of this article, which shows the Left's complacency, extremism, infighting, and tone-deafness is at least as much to blame.
For me the money paragraph is where the poor besieged North Dakota clinic operator attends a "working group meeting" with national movement leaders ("folks from the coasts") and finds "the conversation centered not on the challenges to abortion rights in her state but on whether artwork conveying female power in a New York clinic’s waiting area was too provocative and would alienate its changing patient base."
Mic drop. If that doesn't nail the movement's self-created challenges, I don't know what does.
6
Note; Health care issues are the in the front of the public and I expect abortion is part of Health Care for All. Far be it for me as a man to disagree with the author but I expect they haven't taken into the account of these plans. I am Pro-Choice.
3
It is time to re-frame this whole narrative. This is about men and women having the right to life and the right to safe medical treatments that they and their doctors deem best for them. Privacy is the most important thing. Then push for laws that further expand personal freedoms but acknowledge the need for personal responsibility. Then go after these laws that deny independent breathing people their right to life by denying them proper medical treatments. Lastly insist the procedures that are used in abortions are normal GYN procedures and can be done at all outpatient surgical facilities and in all properly equipped medical practices. No clinics. Planned parenthood turned into a disaster. We cannot afford another one.
1
Trump is stacking the federal courts, including the Supreme Court, with ultra-right wing judges who are appointed for life. Republicans have gerrymandered their way to control of the legislatures and governors' mansions in red states.
No amount of 'fixing the messaging' and 'uniting' the left are going to change that anytime soon.
4
My guess is that the anti-choice crowed is led mostly by white male Catholics and Evangelicals. Pro-choice is led largely by women. That this has less to do with life and more to do with women's rights and equality seems profoundly obvious. When I consider how little regard the right wing has for life and for women and how brave and true the fight from women has been over the years to gain equal rights, when I consider where woman have come from and where they are now, I am certain the only fetus that really matters to the anti-choice crowd is the one that was born white and male and grew up to be a Republican.
6
What I don’t understand is that we are more than 50 years after the advent of the birth control pill and the “sexual revolution“ so why are there, today, so many unwanted pregnancies? It seems to me that organizations such as planned parenthood or similar utterly failed if their mission was to actually provide for parenthood planning, birth-control counseling and similar information programs. Why is this?
Why is abortion, even late term abortion used for family planning purposes? Seems many women regardless of economic circumstance are not responsible in their sexual practices or this would not be the unbelievably frequent procedure that it is. Why is this?
6
@Truthbeknown
Women?
Men are the ones doing the impregnating. Women get raped.
Birth control fails.
No one “uses” abortion as a method of birth control .
The same people who condemn abortion are busy closing women’s clinics which provide birth control.
This issue is not over a clump of
undifferentiated cells
It’s about controlling women.
And we will not be controlled..
15
No one is suggesting control of women; what is suggested is women actually assuming responsibility and exercising control over their bodies as opposed to depending upon the default position, abortion, which is the controversial result.
5
If you are going to get "up in our business," don't stop at prevention of abortions:
1. Mandatory reversible long term birth control and compulsory sex education for all reproductive age females.
2. Mandatory genetic testing and registration for everyone immediately.
3. Mandatory child support from biological fathers. Indigent fathers will be enrolled in compulsory work programs.
until this happens,
4. Automatic maternal health care coverage, pre and post natal.
5. Mandatory social services evaluation of family support situation .
1
Expect challenges to these ideas on liberty and privacy grounds.
1
Elections—and all the money that goes into them—have consequences. The loss of fundamental reproductive rights is one of those consequences.
Republicans have been playing with a long-term strategy for decades. I’m not sure the Democrats have ever had any sort of long-term plan. Now we have minority rule—and we’re all in big trouble.
There are other consequences. No gun control. Conservative judges. Gerrymandering. Low taxes. Weak environmental protections. Denial of climate change.
Never underestimate the ignorance of the American people. Republicans understand this. And they’ll continue to play to win while Democrats will continue to play by the rules.
6
The extreme political positions on both sides of this issue are troubling. The Abortion rights position on legalized termination right up to delivery (or the exceptional post delivery case which has given life to the pro-life claim of infanticide) places the entire moral case on the decision of the woman. It has a ring of extreme Libertarianism which would say that the individual choice and decisions are ALL that matter in a morally ambiguous situation. The Pro Life position that fetal cells at any stage of growth are human life must be legally protected absolutely without recognition of any other reality such as the health of a woman, her economic situation, other dependents, the viability of the fetus and a myriad of other truths reflects a cruel legalism (example is the fetal heartbeat cases in pro life legislation). And the politics is fueled by emotionally charged soundbites instead of reasoned reflection. There could be a wise compromise to this issue, yet instead we are engaged in a shouting match. All the money now being funneled into both sides on means, too, that there is a vested interest by certain employees of both sides to continue the shouting match.
3
I have never understood why any American woman would want the government, any government, to have control of her uterus. Why does it make any sense to the anti- folks?
6
The conservative government of New South Wales a few weeks ago removed abortion from the criminal law, the last Australian state to do so. It had long been allowed under case law similar to Roe v Wade. While there are obviously people here opposed to abortion, it simply isn't a political issue. This is also true of the UK, New Zealand and Canada. Why is America so different to its English-speaking cousins?
3
The left loves to have "frank discussions", fine...let's have one on infanticide.
Roe v. Wade made abortion legal, but it did not make abortion legal past 24 weeks. The justices wrote that improvements in medical management would make the age of viability earlier in pregnancy. Instead of acknowledging this and coming to the debate informed and willing to acknowledge the moral repercussions of killing a fetus which would be viable outside the womb, the demands have become more radical.
If you list to what the governor of Virginia said about "keeping babies comfortable" or read what the NY State Law said about late term abortions, it implies it is permissible to allow infants to die if the parents had intended to abort them. Obviously, courts would have to weigh in but this is very disturbing.
I believe there is a right to choose to end a pregnancy, but I don't believe it is an all-encompassing right in which society is voiceless. Medical procedures are regulated, individual humans have rights which societies has to protect.
One reason the left is losing the battle on abortion is this argument that society has no say in the procedure and the fetus/baby has no rights. The position that the rights granted by Roe v. Wade extend past birth is not supported by any Supreme Court decision and dangerously borders on murder.
Because I want abortion to be legal I feel obliged to have this conversation. I doubt anyone is listening.
Not much fun being lectured to is it?
11
"Oh, goody, another abortion!" Does anyone really think that?
The debate is not really about whether abortion is morally good or bad in general. The debate is about how much (in cases where the mother's life is not at risk) the rest of us, through the law, should inject ourselves in the prospective mother's moral decision, which relates not only to her own body but also to the life of her unborn child.
This is an issue on which on which reasonable people of goodwill can easily differ. So the first step is to calm the dialogue and listen to what the other side has to say (in substance not slogans).
Let us not forget that America purports to be a democracy and that the old long-standing legislative restrictions on abortion were overturned, not through legislation by the elected representatives of the people, but by a politicized judiciary elected by nobody. As a result there has never been the need to form a national concensus on this issue.
There is now. But please, debates, not diatribes. The other side is not a crowd of slobbering demons. They are your fellow citizens.
4
@Gaston I don't know if anyone says "oh goody, another abortion" but there is a photo of a woman holding a sign that says "I had an abortion and it was fabulous" and a video of actress Martha Plimpton saying she had her "best abortion" in Seattle. There are ceremonies with left-leaning clergy blessing abortion businesses, which are covered extensively. And yet there is near-complete media silence when a woman - almost always a woman of color - dies from a "safe and legal" abortion. The media dutifully reports that late-term abortion is rare and always done for the most dire of circumstances, but the truth is that 1 percent of a million is still a lot of viable babies dying, and Guttmacher itself reports that most late-term abortions are not done for the life or health of the mother or serious fetal anomaly.
What we are missing is honest dialogue.
1
there are fewer abortions because there are better contraceptives. it would be a huge mistake to outlaw abortions and contraceptives.
6
I honestly dream of a day in which society is no longer ruled by superstition. Without superstition, abortion would not be an issue. We minimize it by minimizing the need for it - by educating people about fertility, by making contraception affordable and by treating human sexuality as a normal part of evolution rather than in some bizarre realm of “sin”. As soon as we acknowledge the data, we will have fewer abortions. But as soon as superstition gets involved, suddenly sex is a “sin” and pregnancy is the “punishment,” making abortion “bad.” This is so exhausting. Education and Information = fewer abortions. Look at the data Republicans!!! Truth is, they don’t really care because it’s all about the sex.
7
Sex is not always a sin. There are relationships in which sex is an integral part of the relationship and not a sin. And pregnancy is a blessing, not punishment. Sex in the US is heavily regulated by the government. Sex with minors for example (which is not the case in France, for example, a country without superstition) is penalized. Prostitution is also illegal, unlike countries without superstition. Sex is a powerful animal instinct, and it should be handled with care. Why is the culture promoting sex at an early age? What does society gain by it? Those are the fundamental questions.
1
@3Rs I was speaking of mutually consenting adults.
sex might be an animal instinct but we are not animals.
A family house is not a public property, but is it right to kill a life inside that house? You can choose not to reproduce, but it is not right to choose to kill a life.
7
@Tom
Female humans cannot conceive unless there is sperm provided by a male. Contraception is not 100% effective.
It is time for more male humans to start taking responsibility for their part in unwanted/unplanned pregnancies by ensuring their sperm cannot reach an egg.
Even then, we will still need abortions. My life was saved by catholic doctors, priests, in a Catholic Hospital, and my then husband deciding that my life had priority over that of an unborn child. My 10 year was able to grow up with someone they needed more than a sibling - a mother.
Women have a right to life.
13
@Tom
Women are not objects, Tom. We are not buildings, or houses, or bassinets.
8
Susan Collins, Rob Portman, and Jeff Flake all held women's rights in the palms of their hands when it came to appointing Kavanaugh. They spinelessly put yet another religious conservative on the bench. An appalling loss for women's rights. Time to vote Collins and Portman out of office.
10
Why is it only the pro-choice side that is always criticized for not compromising?
Do you think that if the pro-choice side agreed to some compromise, the anti-choice people would magically agree to a cease-fire? No, they will never ever, ever stop till abortion is totally outlawed.
Lots of people say they are queasy about abortion. That is, until it is THEIR daughter or wife, and then many of them amazingly find their queasiness clears up. So these cowards/hypocrites walk around supporting a harsher restriction on other people than they are willing to endure for their own loved ones.
19
It is not necessarily cowardice, more like ignorance or the inability to see another point of view.
As Gloria Steinem put it...'If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament'. Applied then as it does today. Only difference is it would not saddled to a political party.
10
@Stan
Gloria Steinem routinely gave credit to an older female cab driver in either Boston or Cambridge (Steinem wasn't sure of the location) for having uttered those words. GS and the great radical feminist attorney Florynce Kennedy were on their way to a conference when the driver made this comment, which has also been attributed to Kennedy.
1
Abortion is murder. Murder is wrong (duh). Abortion in the cases of rape/incest complicates the issue for many people but such instances are rare and beside the point. The vast majority of abortions are done for convenience. Here is a novel idea: don't have unprotected sex but also know there are consequences to your actions; if the birth control fails then you have an innocent life to take care of. We should not condone the murder of the baby.
We live in very dark times. Between Trump in the WH and the fanatical pro-abortion stance of the Democratic party - God help us.
9
@Poor Richard
I'm certain that for the victims of rape and incest, these attacks are not "beside the point".
6
@John Bacher Beside the point because they comprise a tiny percentage of abortions. They are not unimportant. The fanatical pro-abortion agenda has nothing to do with these cases - what I hear is the demand to allow abortion for any reason at any time.That is what I meant and I think you know that.
The vast majority of abortions concern sexual partners who do not consent to having a child together. This is the issue. Framed in this way early-stage abortion is pretty simple.
3
The incredulous, moral certainty of the pro-choice movement reminds me of the NRA and pro-gun movement. The “woman’s right to choose” movement deletes the fetus from the equation and elevates a individual right to something that requires all tax payers regardless of personal beliefs to underwrite a public/free service. The NRA side of the 2A movement shares much with Pro-choice, an overly broad “right” that places the individuals right to bear over the impact on others and an extreme set of positions inconsistent with the general public. Imagine a 2A right that all citizens have access to firearms and if you cant afford it the gov will provide for free.
Survey after survey suggest that neither the religious pro-life nor the other side represent America’s views on abortion which is far more nuanced. The pro-choice movement has also made a mistake by labeling it a matter of women vs the patriarchy. In fact, women conservatives are the leaders against pro-choice. (NPR 6/18/19 - NPR/Marist poll). Like gun control, abortion is a non-absolute “right” that balances a woman’s “right to choose” with moral, ethical and like it or not concerns if not ambiguity around unborn/fetus/time the life begins/ rights.
7
@Chris
And those conservative women have the right to choose to give birth. They do not have the right to usurp the autonomy of other women.
5
@John Bacher - you miss the point. You are expressing a few that many feel is correct that the woman who is pregnant has sole domain over the decisions affecting her body. Fair enough. But the courts and constitution are simply not in agreement with this point of view even in the most liberal interpretation and by adhering to this kind of "head in the sand" refusal to acknowledge the complexities of he issue, pro-choice advocates have chosen a losing, high risk approach.
1
@Chris
My point very specifically addressed your claim that "conservative women" are in the forefront of the anti-choice mob. Roe v. Wade has the 9th amendment to the Constitution as its basis, so I don't know to what constitution you refer. Surely, you mean circuit courts, the judgments of which are open to challenge, and until the SCOTUS strikes it down, Roe v. Wade is still the law of the land however much you and conservative women may disdain it. I maintain neither you nor they have the any claim on the autonomy of a woman who chooses not to reproduce.
2
This is a very well written article. I would have liked that PP and NARAL discuss more the whole issue of maternal child mortality in this country. The u.s. health care system is the richest in the world and yet we have the worst outcomes.
the u.s. is 35th in the world for maternal mortality outcomes. Where is the GOP with their sanctimony and hypocrisy. having a child in this country is one of the most dangerous times in a womans' life.
women of color who have limited access to prenatal health care is a problem. there are also women who have very good prenatal care and still die.
2
Abortion opponents were not set back on their heels and started organizing only when Obama was elected. Their work goes far back beyond that. It goes right back to Roe v. Wade, and took off in a big way many years before Obama.
1
The age demographic most affected by access (or not) to abortion is 18-29. Voting rates among this group? 20-40%.
If they do not care, why should the rest of us?
2
Here we go again; this is precisely how Democrats lose elections. They run an extremely divisive single-issue race against duplicitous GOP candidates who don’t give a hoot about the unborn, but claim they do in order to win votes. Then we end up with the likes of Donald Trump in the Oval Office. What good is winning battles if you repeatedly lose wars?
4
Abortion should not be an issue today. The people who are fervently against it are right wing extremists. They pay no attention to science or reason.
3
Watching the Movie "One Child Nation", about the implementation and after effects of the policy of only allowing one child per family in communist China, I was horrified by the images of late term fetuses thrown into a landfill like so much garbage.
The powerful revulsion I felt solidified my options on this very sensitive and personal matter.
Aborting a healthy late term baby is beyond violent and inhumane.
But on the other hand, our government, through local law enforcement, being given the power to call the shots on all abortions is also gravely disturbing.
The notion that if my wife, daughter or loved one, had been violently violated through rape or incest the government could force her to risk her life giving birth to the result of that violation is beyond the pale and feels like theocracy.
Both views…the right that a woman has a right to choose and also having strict regulations on when and why abortions can be performed, are both part of the only solution possible.
Both views are undeniably ethically and morally correct.
This debate is absolutely irreconsilable.
We need to agree to disagree with a compromise like Roe so we can move past this.
Without compromise, this issue will NEVER EVER go away.
Imagine all the advocacy money spent of lawyers and lobbyists, no doubt in the 100s of millions of dollars, being redirected to helping adoptions and living breathing children in need all over the world.
Is there a politician out there bold enough to support this?
1
The ardent friends of the fetus aren't "pro-life". They're anti-choice hypocrites who are just crazy about potential people until they pop out of the womb (if they make it, given the high infant mortality rate in America), then it's bootiestraps, baby. Their concern for the unborn doesn't move them to be as strident in the demand for universal pre-natal care, paid parental leave, government subsidized daycare or healthcare for all, as they are about interfering in a private medical issue between a woman and her doctor.
6
This is just one more reason voters should not do what they did in 2016: stay home or cast a "purity" vote. Donald Trump will get 1-3 more SCOTUS picks if he is returned to office.
@Paul in NJ
Good people need to vote for 3rd party candidates period. Voting for a Dem is no different than voting for an R. The results are the same and the proof is in the Congressional Record.
I just saw a feminist movement on Netflix that took place in the 70's. We are reliving times past again and again. Why can't this country move forward is beyond me.
1
Young guys, like my former self, often are the most committed to abortion. And you can fancy it up but the bottom line is that it saves our skins. If men felt comfortable at pro-choice rallies, they would carry the biggest signs. But men like me are cads even though we carry guilt. And women who compromised once don’t welcome back the bad guy. Abortion rights aren’t just about women’s bodies. There’s also sweet revenge. He made me do it and now my sisters and I, and not him, are taking it into our own hands.
The article is unfair in that it suggests that Planned Parenthood is only interested in fund raising, and not in care of women.
Planned Parenthood does both, and both needs to be done. If the political work of PP was not done, southern and midwestern states would have banned abortion long time ago.
As much as I would like to help clinics in the south, they are out of reach for the typical donor supporting abortion rights.
And while gerrymandering definitely hurt the defense of abortion rights, it stands to reason that people need to realize that election have consequences. If you believe that your daughter should have access to abortion if she was raped YOU NEED TO VOTE. And you need to vote in federal and state elections.
2
Or NARAL can do the political work, and an organization that purports to provide healthcare like Planned Parenthood can focus on that. Otherwise, it will be not clear what our money is being spent on. I want to provide $ to help women and clinics directly. Not to elect Democrats.
Once again, Democrats are being asked to become more "moderate" in regards to women's rights to placate uneducated, rural voters. I'm one of those liberal voters from a liberal city. I will never vote for or support a candidate whose goal it is to take away my rights. I will not become more moderate. Abortion should not be political, but the Republicans continue to make it political. I can't believe it's almost 2020 and I still have to live in fear of Republicans.
I have the right to my own body. End of story.
9
It gets tiresome when Republicans pass anti-abortion laws that will not stand. Such as the fetal heartbeat laws. Or when they pass laws and ordinances designed to harass abortion providers and drive them out of business. Or when they try to shut down Planned Parenthood. But it is obscene and immoral for so many Democrats to endorse late-term abortion on demand.
With this issue most Americans are not in line with the politicians of either political party. Because the politicians are extremists.
1
The "left" most certainly went to sleep post-Obama 2008 election, believing as did many others that the Obama election represented a permanent realignment in politics and the electorate. It took only 2 short years for that belief to start to fall apart with the 2010 midterms and state elections that went strongly to Republicans, and yet still "the left" failed to see the necessity and priority of the Supreme Court and winning state level elections, putting all of its eggs in the 2012 Presidential basket which gave a temporary illusion of safety once again. Then Merrick Garland happened. And even then we failed to see the level at which McConnell and the Republicans were willing to play at for the long game, and the still cocky belief that it didn't "really" matter because surely Hillary Clinton was going to win in 2016 and nominate RBG's replacement who would be a better "liberal" than Garland. And let's talk about RBG while we're at it: The 80+ year old had 6 years under a Democratic President and Democratic Senate majority (2008-2014) to retire, and she refused to out of whatever sense of hubris that insisted she should be able to work until she died on the bench. Thanks to that, abortion rights and many other rights are dependent on almost 90 year old woman who has been hospitalized at least three times since Donald Trump disrupted the whole plan and won in 2016. God help us if he wins again in 2020 because of more "left" missteps and "sureties"...
3
The tricky legal aspect of abortion is whether or not it is something that is protected under the Constitution.
.. All legal rights not clearly defined in the Constitution..are left up to the states to decide individually.
..And since abortion is not discussed in the Constitution...there are different legal opinions on whether or not it is something that should be left up to the states..
..--And the conservative states have kept pushing the legal fight that abortion (or certain aspects of abortion) is not Constitutionally protected. And this is how they keep chipping away at the Roe v Wade decision..
I'm a moderately pro-choice Trump voter, and I'm disgusted at how polarized this issue has become within the past year. Both strict abortion bans and "abortion until delivery" laws are equally horrifying to me. What was wrong with the old abortion laws? Why must both sides escalate this issue?
19
Thanks, @Sadie Slays. Wondering -- what do you think of President Trump's anti-abortion actions? A lot of people see him as the most anti-abortion president in recent memory. Curious how that factors into your voting decisions, if it does.
24
@Elizabeth Dias
You face a tough job, to divine the President's beliefs when they can spin 180 degrees overnight to align with what we now call his 'base.'
Perhaps it's more helpful to think of them in terms of Hugh Hefner's so-called 'Playboy Philosophy.' Hefner was all in favor of women's empowerment, because that might free men from any constraints to doing exactly what they like.
Of course he was talking only about financial and family independence, not about human rights. Thus, Trump.
6
@Sadie Slays
Where did you come up with the notion that "abortion until delivery" is permitted by law? That is patently ridiculous, and nothing but inflammatory hyperbole.
22
Freedom of choice begins BEFORE conception. Abortion never should be used as a primary means of contraception, which it is for many underclass women. Abortion should be permissible during the first trimester, when neonatal testing indicates a severely damaged fetus, or at any time after severe physical injury to the fetus, or where it is imperative to save the physical life of the mother.
That said, Planned Parenthood is a politicized, money-crazed hydra, whose tentacles into the federal government and state and local governments are more pervasive than even the Klan in its heyday. The relationships between government at all levels and Plan Parenthood should be severed, and the organization’s tax exempt status should be revoked. Planned Parenthood should rely on private contributions for the purpose of providing contraceptives, contraceptive counseling, and obstetric and gynecological clinic care. It should not be an abortion provider.
1
Living in Europe as an expatriate American is a daily reminder of how backward the United States is on abortion legislation, gun control, national health care, incarceration for drug addiction , public education, and corruption in government.
What is often taken for granted in Europe is a forever contentious issue in America.
While Trump is taking advantage of these pivotal issues for his political advantage, they will continue to be unresolved long after he’s gone.
38
@Michael Kittle
I live in New York City so there is some semblance of sanity. I understand the impetus to run away from the abject stupidity of the American right wing and the damage they have inflicted on Americans. Bur, unless those of us that know better fight back, America will eventually be lost. I guess the question is whether America is worth saving giving the backwards thinking that is so prevalent among Americans. Have to say, at this point, probably not.
5
IMO one of the few positive things to come out of the Trump era have been the decisive wins by the pro-life movement.
1
Why are abortion rights are under threat decades after Roe, while gay marriage seemingly has won acceptance, except for cake baking? In the world of country club Republicanism, abortion restrictions don't stop them from having access to abortion while failing to legalize gay marriage stopped them, or their children, from marrying the partner of their choice. Or more simply put, for Dick Cheney's daughter to have an abortion did not require recognition of nationwide abortion rights but for his daughter to have a wife required every one else to have similiar rights. The problem with abortion rights is that relatively well off women, particularly Republican women, never have their access to abortion at risk.
4
We are winning on abortion, hands down. Their laws have not defeated our determination. 39% of abortions are by pill and are cheap, accessible and very safe. Abortions for those with resources have never been a problem. And 75% of women who have abortions are low-income, with nearly half living below the federal poverty level. Abortions are happening wherever they are sought and by whomever seeks them. There are individual stories that are heartbreaking. There always are. But the numbers speak for themselves.
Those who are in the know are focused on backsliding because that's where the focus needs to be. There are no gurarantees. But there is no doubt that, as of December 2, 2019, we've got what we earned and they have gotten next to nowhere with all their machinations.
Part of the impetus to deny women the right to abortion is situated in the GOP need to keep their Evangelicals in line.
As fewer people buy into religious affiliation... thinking will change, over time.
Problem is...we need to support local providers on many levels, right now while engaging in broad political strategies. Can we walk and chew gum?
I'm a fan of the excellent Susan Wicklund book (2007) "This Common Secret...."
Part of the impetus to deny women the right to abortion is situated in the GOP need to keep their Evangelicals in line.
As fewer people buy into religious affiliation... thinking will change, over time.
Problem is...we need to support local providers on many levels, right now while engaging in broad political strategies. Can we walk and chew gum?
I'm a fan of the excellent Susan Wicklund book (2007) "This Common Secret...."
Part of the impetus to deny women the right to abortion is situated in the GOP need to keep their Evangelicals in line.
As fewer people buy into religious affiliation... thinking will change, over time.
Problem is...we need to support local providers on many levels, right now while engaging in broad political strategies. Can we walk and chew gum?
I'm a fan of the excellent Susan Wicklund book (2007) "This Common Secret...."
I think it’s more complicated than that. The left has won where it could portray itself as expanding human rights. On abortion it is not so clear that is happening.
The gist of this article is: Most of the main pro-choice groups are in very blue areas. These groups get most of the pro-choice donations, but they take abortion access for granted and spend the money on other priorities. Meanwhile, clinics that provide abortions in red states are struggling financially and shutting their doors.
This is one example of a general problem that affects the entire Democratic party. I live in Michigan and have seen how Democrats have simply written off the entire central part of the U.S. as unwinnable, unimportant "flyover country."
Michigan used to be solidly Democratic, but people here feel abandoned by the Democrats. In 2016, Michigan went -- very narrowly -- for Trump. Democrats need to focus on swing states, and even on the "purple" areas of Red states, in order to win the White House in 2020 and make progress on any liberal goals.
2
@Judy Shapiro
How many D presidential candidates walked a picket line during the GM strike? I only heard of Bernie and Pete. Unions - Dems no longer support unions or union workers.
Health care as a human right - not interested
Life long educational opportunities - not needed
True equality - not worth the effort
The Dems say was it feels the masses want to hear and then quickly move to their agenda. It doesn't help when people on the coasts hate everyone from Flyover,.
1
When pro-choice folks allowed the ostensibly objective media (e.g. Times, N.P.R., P.B.S.) to refer to "anti-abortion" as "right-to-life", it was all over.
After Roe v. Wade, the supporters of abortion rights went to sleep, mistakenly assuming the issue was settled. Meanwhile, those who opposed legal abortion stayed in the game, hunkered down for the duration, and developed strategies for achieving their goal. Their diligence is now paying off.
Regulations, laws, and judicial decisions do not in and of themselves change attitudes and values. Any cultural change of significance involves a continuing struggle over a long period of time, if it is to become the new accepted norm. (Think of the ongoing efforts to effectively define and execute the ruling in Brown v. Board in regard to segregated schools.)
3
How can we get more people who support a woman’s right to choose to regularly vote? I do believe we’re in the majority, we just have to get folks to show up and vote for legislators that support choice.
1
Regulations, laws, and judicial decisions do not in and of themselves change attitudes and values. Any cultural change of significance involves a continuing struggle over a long period of time, if it is to become the new accepted norm. (Think of the ongoing efforts to effectively define and execute the ruling in Brown v. Board in regard to segregated schools.)
After Roe v. Wade, the supporters of abortion rights went to sleep, mistakenly assuming the issue was settled. Meanwhile, those who opposed legal abortion stayed in the game, hunkered down for the duration, and developed strategies for achieving their goal. Their diligence is now paying off.
1
Women with differing views on abortion mix everywhere. In the workplace, at school board meetings, and at day care centers. And so do their significant others. On their own, pro and con coexist . The church stirred things up. But the church also stirs up countless other family issues. Only on abortion has it met equal, unbending opposition. And the reason is apparent. Because babies are at stake. And for all men have to say, it's mostly women who are fighting, both sides claiming the high ground. The abortion debate is grounded in maternalism. Women are fighting among themselves over the rules of pregnancy and its termination. There is no issue that polarizes more. The politics of abortion are well-understood. But the psychology may well be what most matters.
1
The state with the most abortion restrictions is Louisiana. And we have recently read of restrictions that threatened to close down all its clinics. Yet a higher than average rate of Louisiana women get abortions.
There is not much evidence that restrictive laws reduce abortions. These laws get a lot of attention but don’t matter much Lots of resources are dedicated to fighting these laws. It appears that much of the money is needed more elsewhere.
I am an independent Progressive who often votes for Democratic candidates but am tired of holding up all of our many priorities with this obsession over unrestricted abortion.
I am no fan of Bill Clinton, but his position on abortion needing to be safe, legal and rare is something I agree with. In 2019- almost 2020- there are too many good options for birth control for abortion to be a common procedure. When it is medically necessary as decided by a woman and her Doctor, it should be readily available as an outpatient procedure at any hospital that provides OB/GYN services and as such should be covered by health insurance. The law can mandate that any licensed hospital that provides OB/GYN services also offer these procedures and is well within the mandate of the government.
Planned Parenthood has way too much baggage to get any sympathy from me or any political support. The way they endorsed Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders- a lifelong avowed supporter of choice- poisoned the well and that can be laid at the feet of Ms. Richards.
Standing with the abortion on demand extremists has cost the Democratic Party dearly and that translates to policy defeats far removed from reproductive rights. It is time to put the political priorities elsewhere.
4
@David Gregory
Nearly everyone can agree that abortions should be rare. Better access to birth control will further decrease the number of abortions, which are at the lowest number since tracking started.
The people driving the Dem policy bus are kicking off people like us who want it legal, safe, regular medical procedure, and rare.
2
RvW should be articulated by those who support abortion rights, rather than giving an impression that RvW allows anytime/anywhere abortion rights.
RvW is very much in line with the majority of Americans in that it allows more regulation as the term of pregnancy increases.
5
Only a woman and her doctor should decide whether or not to abort a pregnancy. That being said, the primary goal should be to help women prevent unwanted pregnancies, rather than have to terminate them. I would like to see more data. What is the rate of abortion among women of varying socioeconomic status, level of education, age range, marital status, religious belief, ethnicity? Is the abortion rate the same in all the States, or are there regional disparities, and what might be their causes? How does the US rate compare to that of other developed countries? Legal or not, having to terminate a pregnancy is never a happy occurrence, so what can we do to minimize the need for abortions?
1
@Laurence Hauben
Much of what you asked for is available from the US census data, CIA Factbook, and the UN data sets.
As dire as the fight for reproductive rights is now, I think it’s about to become more so. It seems pretty clear that the Supreme Court will figure out a way —facing settled law —to atomize the power of Choice champions by giving the states more power to decide. A decade from now there will be states where women can go for the procedure and states where they can’t, and some in between. It’s happening now in anticipation of this turn of events. Basically, the anti-choice people outworked the other side. Hardly surprising. A whole generation grew up knowing little of the 1960s/early 70s struggle. The other side didn’t get comfortable. It didn’t forget.
12
It is doubtful that the Supreme Court will rule that
any and all abortion are illegal.
It might rule that States have a right to regulate whether
a viable babe in the womb can be aborted without medical
necessity.
I wonder why, in such a long article it is not mentioned that
the fetus/babe in the womb is as human as anyone else ?
I am in favor of Free National Health Care
Free Pre and Post Natal Care
Paid Maternity and Paternity Leave.
Free Child Care/Free Pre-School.
My wife and I adopted two children who were severely disabled,
one soon after birth, another when she was a year old.
Their lives were difficult but for the most part happy.
We never had the national conversation we should have had
before the Supreme Court made its un-constitutional decision back in 1973 and I doubt any of the Judges thought there would be so many abortions of healthy babes in the womb.
15
If you want to force women to carry a pregnancy and give birth, then why not also advocate for the biological father to be forced to work and wages automatically garnished to support the child. There would also be a need to force the man to have partial custody or visitation and mentally providing for the child as well as financially. Oh, and the State should also be forced to feed and insure the child if the parents still cant make ends meet since it will be forcing the woman to give birth and forcing it's own sense of what is right or wrong. The State should also be forced to provide medical and mental health care to the woman for violating her autonomy and her beliefs and being forced to endure the difficulty of pregnancy and the very real mental and physical changes to her body.
On second thought, maybe all men should be forced to have a vasectomy since it's reversible, and if they want to have a child, they could apply for a license and offer proof they can care for the child and then if approved, the vasectomy is reversed. If that man then causes a pregnancy with a woman who was not on the application, then 99 years in jail or the death penalty seems fair.
10
@JohnBrown
There is zero science or legal knowledge supporting your opinions, only religious dogma. Fortunately, this country was founded on the separation of church & state, & I advise you to remember that. If you ignore it, it will be at your own peril.
2
@John Brown John, are you also in favor of sex education, and of free contraceptives? This would seem like the easiest way to decrease the number of abortions taking place in this country.
1
While canvassing in NH in 2016, I met a devout Catholic woman who thought Trump was unfit for office but had reservations about Clinton because of her position on abortion. When I pointed out that Clinton's believed that abortion should be legal, safe, and rare, the woman informed me that this was no longer the case. Liberal feminists had decided that this position implied that there was something immoral with having the procedure. Perhaps they were right to feel this way but the upshot is that this woman and many like her voted for a man who would outlaw abortions completely. As a result, woman will not have to feel guilty about having an abortion because it won't be an option.
8
@Nana2roaw
The problem with that argument is that the framework for outlawing abortion is rooted in precisely Clinton's way of thinking.
Either you believe the government should have a say in whether a medical procedure should be performed or not.
If you believe that government should have a say, you are denying that a medical decision should be solely between a patient and their doctor. That is the fundamental point of disagreement.
That is how you lay the groundwork to outlaw abortion. If the government gets a seat at the table, there is nothing legally that you can do to stop it from fully exercising that right to the point of a ban.
1
Yeah, woman was forced to face with the psychological and possible physical trauma of unwanted pregnancy and birth. Yeah, it is much more humane that let the woman decide what she wants.
1
Some people here wonder why abortion is still an issue when contraception and morning after pills are available. Well the strange thing is that those who oppose abortion very often oppose these birth control methods and fight their production and the government paying for them falling back upon 'education' and rhythm methods. It seems that they are anti sex or would continue the idea of keeping women bare foot and pregnant.
27
@just Robert If we hold the presumption that such women are competent to vote, then they have the responsibility to purchasesnd use contraceptives.
1
"Joe Biden reaffirmed his decades-long support for the Hyde Amendment, and was harshly criticized by supporters of abortion rights, including from within his own campaign; within a day he had changed his stance."
Did Biden change because his own beliefs changed? Or did Biden change because the democrat party has gotten so extreme?
10
What is extreme about allowing women to make decision about her bodies and her health? The conservatives don't want the Government to replace the health insurances, and yet they are ok with the Government's mandate over woman's body.
3
No one will ever win an argument about killing babies. Why are we not switching the argument to prevention of unwanted pregnancies. Long-acting reversible contraceptives are 99% effective. Why doesn't Planned Parenthood tout benefits of LARCs? I repeat: Unwanted pregnancies can be eliminated. Why is that not the focus of Planned Parenthood, especially since they want to talk more about women's overall health.
10
@Sorah Dubitsky PP doesn't just "tout the benefit" of LARCs, they also provide free and discounted access to them. In many communities PP providers are more experienced at inserting and removing LARCs than most other providers.
At base it seems to me there are two main reasons for the present situation.
The first is the decline of the Democratic Party due to conservative forces within the party. The Clintons, Obama, Biden, Buttigieg and others. The pathetic response of Democrats to the crash of 2008 ensured, as predicted, the devestating lose in a census year. That, in turn, resulted in the gerrymandered hole we find ourselves in. In football they call that an open field. The goal is right there and no is there to stop you. So, by 2016 the Democrat party had almost disappeared. Every Federal branch firmly in Republican hands. The majority of state houses in Republican hands.
Whosh - in came the Republicans and out went abortion rights. Wanna fix the situation? Win elections. How? Don't listen to the architects of failure when they advise conservatism for Democrats.
The second cause of abortion rights erosion? Communication and language. Two areas where the left has failed miserably for decades.
First step: ALWAYS refer to anti abortion efforts and organiation as Forced Birth. This holds true for political speech in every situation. Never back down from using "Forced Birth". This holds true for casual conversations.
You'll find it knocks the Forced Birth people back on their heels.
So start there and go on the offensive. Talk about how anti-abortion laws kill women. Resurrect the War on Women.
It's right there in front of you for the taking.
15
The premise of this article is flawed. Democrats are not the ones who are radical on this issue. The Va and NY laws essentially codified Roe, which is where most of the country is. You know what's radical? The law in Missouri that required a women to submit to TWO medically unnecessary pelvic exams for a medication abortion, which basically amounted to state sponsored sexual assault. Or how about the newly introduced bill in OH requiring transplanting ectopic pregnancies, something that isn't even medically possible. Or the AL law where a doctor performing an abortion faces more time in prison than a rapist. THAT is what is radical and extreme.
47
I recall with horror almost that my co-worker wasn't allowing his daughter to date. He emphasized to his son and daughter the immorality of premarital sex. It seemed backward and cruel. 20 years later, I agree with him.
6
Thank you to the brave and courageous women protecting women and girl's reproductive health mentioned in this article.
14
The game of politics is a tricky one to play. One decision could either hand you an election or cost you an election. The best thing in a national election is to pick a candidate who doesn't stray too far from the middle. A Moderate or a Centrist would function better in the White House, although anyone could function better than Trump in the White House. Politicians who stray too far from the Center will, in most cases, struggle in the approval rating category. The game of politics is a tricky one to play. One decision could either hand you an election or cost you an election. The best thing in a national election is to pick a candidate who doesn't stray too far from the middle. A Moderate or Centrist would function better in the White House, although anyone could function better than Trump in the White House. Politicians who stray too far from the Center will, in most cases, struggle in the approval rating category. Bipartisan politicians perform better in approval ratings when compared to their more partisan counterparts. Just look at the governors of Massachusetts, Maryland, Vermont, Montana, & Louisiana. They all have governors that are affiliated with the nondominant party in their state. Yet, they're quite popular. Charlier Baker, Larry Hogan, & Phil Scott constantly rank high on approval ratings, with Baker & Hogan regularly crossing 70% in approval within their state. It shows that bipartisanship can pay dividends in a political campaign.
2
Just this past Friday night Rachel Maddow devoted her program to the violent, abusive, and obsessive tactics of Operation Rescue, and their bizarre goal of killing to protect life—most notably Scott Roeder's murder of Dr. George Tiller in the doctor's church. Their record is indeed an upsetting one. I don't understand how this group operates—don't they have to work?
Would that they would turn their rabid zeal to helping humanity in a cause like Climate Change—or better—promoting Birth Control. I suppose humanity will always be obsessed with the ultimate means of production, and absolute control of it.
"The first recorded evidence of induced abortion is from the Egyptian Ebers Papyrus in 1550 BCE. " —wikipedia
There will always be abortion.
The choice is not abortion or no abortion.
The choice is safe abortion or unsafe abortion.
45
Abortion rights is a killer for Democrats. Go back to Bill Clinton's view. The “women's health” angle is completely unconvincing.
7
You say it's not a woman's health issue because you've never carried a pregnancy to term or been forced to give birth. It destroyed my body and that's a fact despite the fact I wanted and love my child and it would be devastating if forced. It permanently alters you and not for the better. Nobody should have the right to force any woman to carry a child and give birth.
It also takes a huge toll having the mental and financial burden all on the woman, so don't tell me or any woman it's not a women's health issue.
5
@J Farrell
The c-section rate alone makes pregnancy (and therefore abortion) a woman's health issue.
2
Please, please, please stop with the "divided left" narrative. It is not accurate or helpful.
25
In the USA the legality of abortion is based on a Supreme Court decision that somewhere in the Constitution there is a right to privacy and that this includes the right to abortion . Most other nations ( if not all) where abortion is legal had elections to decide whether to legalize it. This may be the reason why the right to abortion i s constantly challenged here ( and not elsewhere ).
16
The left *should* be on the run. As a man I have no interest in controlling a woman's use of her own body, when hers is the only interest at stake. When she becomes pregnant, though, another interest--that of the fetus--is created. She simply does not have absolute freedom to get rid of it.
Also, men are entitled to equal protection of their interests. The father has a compelling interest, in the individual case, in the life of the specific fetus and, more generally, men have a compelling interest in the definition of human life itself. You won't be permitted to write men out of this.
Look, taken at face value, the left's position leads ineluctably to the conclusion that feticide laws generally are wrong. What is a perfectly acceptable exercise of autonomy becomes a heinous crime just because someone else causes the feticide. Please.
5
There is the question of freedom, and there is the question of responsibility. Bringing another life into this world is an enormous responsibility. Abortion is an acknowledgement of that. Sometimes women are just not at the point in their lives when they are ready to be mothers. (Not all abortions happen for this reason, but let’s just address this one aspect of a complicated issue.)
When a man causes a pregnancy but isn’t at the point in his life when he is ready to assume responsibility for another human’s life, he has the option of leaving. Many men wouldn’t feel comfortable making this decision, but it is there for them. And many do make that choice.
When a woman causes a pregnancy but isn’t at the point in her life when she is ready to assume the same responsibility, she has the options of abortion or adoption if she does not want to parent. Adoption requires her to go through childbirth at great risk to her own health and wellbeing, and it is a loving and probably difficult choice many women do make. Abortion is also a difficult choice, but may ultimately be a loving one as well, and it is considerably less risky to the woman’s health than childbirth.
I’m not arguing for one or the other. I just think it is morally right for all these options to be available to women. In addition, of course, to effective contraception for everyone that wants it.
4
She has, because fetus uses her body, and it is her who will suffer the consequences. When we will have the mandatory organ and blood donation than your argument may have some merit, until then pregnancy is woman business, and she should be only one who decides what to do about it.
3
If they are not at the “point in their lives” they should not irresponsibly be having relations. Morality is the question here not why to do when a “mistake” happens as a result of a no so ready individual.
2
Many Tears Ago
Two people entered a Planned Parenthood door,
Devastation to the core.
One forever damaged, one forever dead,
Writing on the wall needs to be read.
On her mother a child’s hopes were pinned,
Yet mom has cast her fate to the wind.
Abortion is truly not about choice,
It is all about a tiny voice.
Protecting this eternal creation,
The only hope for a fallen nation.
Never knew there was a heart that beat,
Should have looked at tiny hands and feet.
I wonder if she knew her life was for sale,
And understood the ultimate betrayal.
I wish I could say it wasn’t so,
But that was many tears ago.
12
My thoughts exactly. It’s a life. A tiny child. A heartbeat that is dependent on that mother to survive.
Morality needs to be emphasized.
I agree with an earlier commenter: teach about prevention and pregnancy rather than quick solutions to end a child’s life.
How about ppl start taking g responsibility for their actions and not cough up $500 to terminate their “mistakes.”
A life is a life.
I raise a child. I have suffered and sacrificed for my child. My life lessons have been immense. However, the rewards surpass any relationship, job, trophy, accolades or degrees I may have. I am a mother. I work hard to see the joy in my son’s eyes. Sad there are those who don’t get to hold the gift they have been granted.
2
Abortion issue is easily solved. Make women 100% legally and financially responsible for their kids. No more saying the baby has only a mother when it comes to deciding to abort or not. But the baby has a mother and father (or society) when it comes time to support the kid financially. If women want 100% control of the decision then women need to take 100% of the responsibility.
Men who want visitation or joint custody of their kids can work out a deal with the mothers. The deal can include child support.
4
@Reader In Washington
As a feminist, I agree with this idea whole-heartedly. In principal. But what would be the effects on the children born? Abject poverty? It’s a tough one.
I think it is totally possible after we have the law that will mandate the organ- and blood donation independently of the people wish. After all isn't shameful that some people die from kidney failure while other have two kidneys?
1
@Reader In Wash, DC
P.S. The need to work out deal for the fathers who want an interest in the kid even applies to men who are married to the mothers.
The U.S. is a deeply misogynistic society is now becoming an undeniable fact.
33
If Trump is re-elected this will grow worse. Therefore, I do hope that this article sticks in the minds of: 1) Democrats who might not vote for a middle-of-the-road candidate, should he/she be nominated; 2) Democrats who might not vote for a progressive candidate, should he/she be nominated.
5
“...portraying Democrats as supporters of infanticide — an allegation the left says is patently false...”
This language suggests that even though the Democrats claim the allegation is false it may actually not be false. To suggest that Democrats support infanticide is simply absurd and yes, patently false. Not because the left says it is patently false but because it is undoubtedly, unequivocally a falsehood. This is a great example of how the Republican propaganda machinery works. They use the media’s own desire to maintain neutrality to plant a seed of doubt into uninformed minds.
29
Women of means will always be able get abortions if they want, poor women will not and will die in the back alleys.
Politicians and religious groups have no right to intrude into women’s bodies. An embryo or fetus is not a “baby”.
How about a law that says the father is totally responsible for ALL care of any offspring? Let’s see if that changes ideas about abortion.
13
The Republican Party platform no longer allows any exceptions to their anti-abortion stance, not rape, not invest, not even the life of the pregnant girl. They are not pro-life. They are extremists.
20
A surprising number of men who are "Pro-Life" believe that there is no such thing as rape. I know many of those men and, in their minds, women get what they deserve. Eliminating a woman's right to decide what happens to her own body will take us back to the days of abandoned women in nunneries, babies crying on doorsteps where they were left with the hope that someone will open the door and feed them before they starve, and fetuses found dead in garbage dumps. This was the time before Roe vs Wade.
19
“Don’t ask me how it all happened,” Ms. Wood, 70, a retired social worker northeast of Atlanta”. No? It happened because people thought it was a done thing. They didn’t take the warning signs seriously nor the fanatical zeal to undo Roe & end abortion at any cost. That it would include the election of an authoritarian thug like Trump seemed beyond the imagination of the left. Abortion and reproductive rights in general are deeply opposed by a significant portion of the population of Americans identified as evangelical and conservative Christians. They are just as opposed to the LGBTU communities quest for equality and will target them next. They made a deal with the devil and believe god sanctioned Trumps election in answer to their prayers. When they “win” the reproductive rights war expect them to come after other rights we take for granted. Doubt me if you will but with a willing Republican Party in thrall to Trump you should expect no less from them. Nothing else will be satisfactory then a boot heal on the throat of your liberty.
18
As a woman born after Roe v Wade and as a child of a 14 year old mother and raised by my grandparents, I just don’t understand bringing unwanted children into the world.
Our unwed teenage mother birth rate has decreased to almost a trickle of what it was three decades ago. Why? More access & education to family planning: abstinence, birth control, adoption, abortion. This means, less resources spent on WIC, food stamps/EBT, state funded medical insurance, lesser likelihood of DHS involvement due to unwanted children. What resources are overwhelmed or lack funding? WIC, education, DHS. (Speaking from experience: I have no relationship w/my mother b/c I was subjected to an abusive household, w/social services. I am so thankful for the decrease in unwanted pregnancies as it saves another from a potentially similar fate)
Let’s talk about about saving our children, those already born breathing air right now. We have 1 out of 7 US children that are food insecure. Where’s the outrage? Again, SMH trying to bring unwanted children into the world.
If Roe v Wade is overturned or it ruled lawful to virtually restrict abortion in a particular state, then here we all go again! Why? Do you think that proponents of abortion will stop if it is reversed?No, it’ll just be a reversal of sides. Let’s all stop the insanity already. Abortion is legal. Let’s move onto the next childhood issue for Christ’s own sake. I’m sure he just LOVES to hear the same prayers over & over & over again.
16
Slavery was legal. Just because it was legal, we should have moved on? I do not think you will find anyone agreeing to this argument. Legal and morally right are nor necessarily the same.
1
It’s difficult to strategize against Republican hypocrisy in general but, in the case of abortion, it’s especially challenging. How does one respond to so-called evangelical RINO’s who, on the one hand, proclaim and celebrate the “sanctity of life” prior to actual birth, and then, with respect to everything from health care and capital punishment to gun control and climate change, declare the out-of-the-womb honest-to-goodness human being fair game, as it were?
13
Im a male so I am almost loathe to comment on this piece of fine journalism. All I wanted to say is its a woman body and she has a right to choose.
The other point I wanted to make was fertility a
rates and birth rates are plummeting in this country, even among immigrant populations. https://www.sciencealert.com/us-birth-rate-hits-record-low-fertility-plummets-uncharted-territory-cdc-decline
Couples have made the decision to not have children because of climate change and political instability. Yes, thats right conservatives, it looks really sketchy and random out there with a random and sketchy "acting" President at the helm.
The fertility trend is not going to change, and no one can say why males spermatozoa are refusing to swim on the fertility front.
So all those "Onward Christian Soldiers" out there have nothing to worry about RE: Abortions.
No procreation= no abortions
Its almost a catchy bumper sticker.
2
Not so fast. The government has control over our bodies to discourage unethical or inmoral actions. For example, it is illegal to sell body parts (kidneys, eyes, etc.), prostitution is also illegal. Our legal system is not based on the principle that we can do as we please with our bodies.
1
Those ‘Bernie-or-busters’ in 2016 must feel pretty smug; all of you own this.
5
So, and where were all Dems before 2016?
All the more reason to make sure we elect a Democrat president and a few more Democrats in the senate. Laws against abortion are basically religious in nature and thus are unconstitutional.
12
@USMC1954
The Constitution is a very plastic document that accommodates much that is unconstitutional. As the great abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison wrote, "The Constitution is a covenant with the devil".
With the morning after pill, birth control pills, abortions financed by the government should not be financed unless proven rape has occurred. There really is o reason for a woman to get pregnant with the morning after pill, condoms , and birth control pills if she does not want to. why should the government pay any money for abortions anymore unless a rape has occurred. wealthy billionaires that support abortion can finance the abortion mill Planned Parenthood on their own. Why does the government have to pay for this horrible action? Let the private sector raise tax deductible donations to commit these abortions. If a young woman has sexual intercourse and does not take appropriate birth control measures why should all taxpayers have to finance her abortion? Bet Buffet and Gates would each donate one billion to fund abortions by Planner Parenthood. Pass the cost from the government to the private sector. By the way the founder of planner Parenthood supported Eugenics. Why should tax payers support that organization? Simply have the billionaires that hardly pay any taxes donate to Planned Parenthood.
4
Because the Government doesn't pay for contraception and morning-after-pills.
9
I agree. And every coming of age person should also take a free course in Natural Family Planning. The cost is a $10 thermometer. Zero hormones. Learn the fertility and there don’t be any unwanted pregnancies. I’ve taught many ppl this method and I respect life. Would only bring a life into the world that I have planned using this very old method.
1
@yulia
They should.
1
Grand Old Patriarchy
The most regressive, destructive, misogynistic force in human history.
Vote them out on November 3 2020 in historic numbers.
15
The abortion rights groups may be on the defensive, but we, the women of America are on the offensive. We will not stand still and let the rights of women be destroyed by Trump and his collaborators. They have only disgust and dismissal for women...watch us vote! We will not go back!
13
Are the people who call themselves pro-life doing anything about climate change? Climate change is already killing people and will kill millions more, more than all the abortions combined. If you're doing nothing about climate change, you're not pro-life.
15
Time to start mailing used sanitary napkins to certain scientifically ignorant legislators who don't know the difference between a fertilized egg and a baby? Do they want to inspect in case a death certificate is needed for a period?
5
I really hope that this article doesn't reflect today's thinking of the post-Roe generations or we are in real trouble. It is so far off message and focuses on bureaucracy instead of on our fight for abortion & reproductive rights & reproductive justice.
There is no "left" when it comes to abortion rights. There are Republicans for Choice & Catholics for Choice. Neither would call themselves "left,"wouldn't you say?
1. I'm alarmed that anyone who provides abortion funding can also believe it is eugenics after a certain cutoff point. You either believe in bodily autonomy or not. You either believe abortion is eugenics or not. But the contradiction...
What do you say to the next poor, young female who has been molested & comes to you but you've already given out your $500,000? Turn her away because she's over the limit & would qualify as eugenics according to your formula? What would you do?
Planned Parenthood really blew it when they fired Dr. Wen. She filled a leadership & educational gap that is gone again. At a time when we need to be educating & organizing & politicizing the fight for abortion & Roe v Wade, removing her is a real blow.
2
Agree with you about removing Dr. Wen. I met her at a conference not long before she was ousted and she had the real vision to lead the movement through this challenging and divisive time. Her op-ed when she left was heartbreaking, and worth a read.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/07/19/opinion/sunday/leana-wen-planned-parenthood.amp.html
2
Will we see a resurgence of Jane, the underground abortion group that was active across the country prior to Roe?
1
Maybe stop framing this argument as a left vs right issue and approach it as a women's rights issue. What right does the state or any religious association have in dictating the choices a women has regarding her health and her body? We don't see government intervention or religious proclamations limiting the choices men can make regarding their health or their bodies. This is solidly a women's rights issue in my mind.
16
For ethical or moral reasons, the government controls what we can do with our bodies. It is illegal to sell your body parts (kidney, eye, finger, etc.). Or sell your body for sex (prostitution). The idea that the government cannot control what we do with our bodies is not accurate, and perhaps something we all agree we should not change. Abortion should be legal but for other reasons. I understand it makes for a powerful slogan, but we should not make it a principle for creating laws.
Those who oppose abortion take desperate measures. But the fact is that they are losing. Most important, the abortion pill accounts for 40% of abortions and is virtually always safe. As for access restrictions, there are few women who can't get to a clinic and back in a day. And. because of growing family and community support, the ride is more likely there.
The overwhelming majority of cases result in an abortion with minimum fanfare. As for more involved procedures, they are another thing. Women who wait too long face difficulties. Women with a reason for delay can be stymied. Outreach to the procrastinators is essential. But, thankfully, routine cases are mostly routine. And so pro-choice activists are able to concentrate on backslide.
Whatever court battles have been lost, services remain adequate if not ideal. And the main battle is to protect Roe. The leadership in that battle will not be caught by surprise. The big worry is reversal of Roe. There are no guarantees. But Roe is the existing precedent, which helps. And we've got numbers and commitment.
Every justice knows what happens outside the Courts the moment they strike Roe down. And if you think that doesn't matter, think again.
5
In some ways, the damage the trump administration has done is a wake up call to those of us who were complacent. Sadly, many of us were. However, the Merrick Garland debacle was less about complacency, and more about Democrats not having the numbers in the Senate to force a vote on Garland. The second problem is that for those of us who have had an abortion, it's still difficult to talk about. Not because it was the wrong choice, but because it is a choice that feels like it must be forever justified. It's must easier to call it a miscarriage. I know. That's what I do. I am not ashamed that I had an abortion, but do not feel it is my responsibility to justify my decision to anyone. It was a decision my husband and I made together, based upon the information we had at the time. But too often, women are put in the position that if they choose to terminate a pregnancy, they are somehow not maternal, or that no "real" woman would knowingly choose to end her pregnancy. Doing so makes her less of a woman. So we are placed in the position to defend our decision. But after the initial joy of giving birth, few care to follow up on what happens next. Seeing the results of mothers who either couldn't or didn't want to raise their children is heartbreaking. The children are literally society's disposable product. Abortion may never desirable, but it is necessary.
8
It's time for the current generation of women of childbearing years to step up and fight for what they want: whatever that turns out to be.
2
The term ‘pro-life’ is nothing more than religiously-inspired, sophistical, dogmatic and doctrinaire misnomer. It is virtually meaningless as a serious philosophical concept. In a basic sense, nearly everyone on the planet is pro-life, especially and understandably those who first and foremost value their own lives. So let’s call a spade a spade: Those who oppose abortion are ‘anti-abortion’, not ‘pro-life,’ unless their values give primacy to the life and interests of the only person in question, namely the pregnant woman.
18
I find it interesting that while many on the left nod when people “evolve” on some issues over the years, they seem perplexed when others “evolve” to more conservative positions-especially given all of the medical and scientific advances over the past few decades. I think I could intellectually respect someone who is pro abortion who admits their decision to have an abortion is ending a living entity, with an endpoint of life. I would disagree with their position, but it’s an fair starting point for mutual discussion.
4
@Ncinblood
There is TREMENDOUS lack of scientific understanding about fetal development & the birth process in our society at large. That lack of understanding is seized by pro-forced-birthers to dazzle otherwise kind, understanding people to bring them to their side on the medical concern of abortion.
4
Why should they agree with your definition of life? What difference does it make: if they are for abortion because they do not consider the embryo as a living thing, or despite them accepting that embryo is a living thing? For me, it is not a question. Question is about the woman's control over her body.
4
A single human cell is just that... uniquely human. There’s no debating it ..,
1
The abortion restrictions illegally introduced in some States will be challenged in the courts, and that will test the hold Roe vs Wade has in the justice system.
I think that hold is unshakable because it's the law, which can't just be violated by a judiciary until no longer the law, which I think will never happen.
What must be remembered is that court rulings by themselves such as Roe v Wade are the "law of the land, " as we have assumed all these years. Through other cases previous rulings often get reversed.
1
Well, there’s the problem right in the headline: defending women’s reproductive rights isn’t just the domain of the progressive Left but of reasonable people across the country. The recent attacks on reproductive rights are coordinated by a small, but highly organized group of religious fundamentalists who are not just at odds with the progressive Left but mainstream America.
15
We have missed the point of the "Pro Life" movement. It has been financed and pushed by conservative elements who don't want women to have any control over their lives. They picked one issue to advance their anti women beliefs and it worked.
13
This issue has always seemed like one that can be resolved to me because the end goal for everyone is the same: every child be wanted, and well-cared-for -- it's just how you get there. I think women should have the right to choose and I also think that no-one wants to have to choose to get an abortion. Providing free contraception and teaching people how to use it, developing male birth control, making sure both men and women are equally responsible for the children they create, all seem like good ways to me to lower the abortion rate. And I'm sure there are lots of other ways that people can come up with when the goal is to figure out how to bring the abortion rate to as close to zero as we can without involving the government.
7
Chemical/drug induced self treatment will make Roe-Wade irrelevant. Especially with development of better abortifacients.
3
Of course Republicans deserve most of the blame for winnowing away the Constitutional rights they don't like and wrapping an NRA flag around the ones they covet, but Democrats lack of fight deserves a share of the blame as well. They allowed Republicans to define the argument by labeling themselves as "Pro Life", the insinuation being everyone else must be "Pro Death". Democrats need to fight the label and convey it is not about life or death, but choice. Democrats don't desire women, be they Republican or Democrat, abort their fetuses, only that they have the choice to abort their fetus. Though Republicans like to claim a purest position, there have been recent examples of how they too covet the access to abortions when the alternative can prove detrimental personally (e.g., marriage) or politically (e.g., re-election). Democrats need to reframe the argument and show Republicans for the hypocrites they are in order to preserve this hard fought right in need of a re-fight.
4
Here's the simple fact: The Republicans were willing to rend the fabric of governance and tarnish the reputation of the Senate, the courts, and the Presidency to bend this issue, and Democrats would not in a million years have mimicked that imperial behavior.
12
As with other hot button issues, the Dems and Liberals (driven by their extreme left factions) have taken an “all or nothing” line on this. And, as it has with other issues, this has given opponents an opening to exploit, which they have done very well. While the hard left has insisted that this is a human rights fundamental, which has to be addressed immediately, the reality is that it’s a complex social issue, which means it’s going to be messy, take a long time to work through, and result in casualties along the way. This has happened throughout human history (see the abolition of slavery, the replacement of hunter-gatherers by organized farming societies, the bloodbaths of many religious upheavals and reformations, the industrial revolution, etc., etc., etc.). When this is combined with the tendency of some hardliners to scream, shout, and insult those who have differing views, it becomes even harder. “THE PERFECT IS THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD”.
5
According to the CDCs, spontaneous abortion before a woman even knows she’s pregnant is surprisingly common. If abortion is murder, then surely these accidental fetal deaths must be equally sorrowful. But we don’t mourn them. We don’t talk about them and we don’t even think about them. That fact tells us a few things. First, that human reproduction is tricky, and doesn’t always succeed. Second, it tells us what the anti-choice movement is really all about: controlling women by prohibiting their autonomy or, alternatively, strapping them with the double-full-time job of raising a child in a country that offers no help for doing so. Patriarchy is only concerned about abortion when it’s a woman’s mind rather than her body that makes the decision.
14
Shouldn't the correct pronoun be "over" rather than "on" abortion? There are two sides to the battle-- it's not an attack.
"Battle on" sounds like "war on Christmas" (one sided) rather than a "battle over custody" (two sided).
"Battle over abortion" would mean that there are two sides fighting over laws that concern abortion.
"Battle on abortion" means one party is attacking abortion, which mis-characterizes the conflict.
3
This is a real "Dog Bites Man" story, stating the obvious details, and missing the even more obvious conclusions.
As William Butler Yeats wrote about a Century ago: "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of pasionate intensity. Over two gnerations of the religious right have been indoctrinating the gullible about the abortion issue. The anti-abortion bloc are single-minded, fanatical, and obsessed with this one issue. This Crusade of hypocrisy and self-righteousness allows the alienated and disaffected to paper over the ever worsening material circumstances in their lives, by taking a grim pleasure in making the lives of vulnerable women bearing unwanted fetuses ever more miserable. The Anti-Abortion Laws are the new Jim Crow Laws, merely updated, and directed at women.
The pro-Choice supporters ought to see the erosion of abortion rights and access as the necessary consequence from the totalization of the "Neo-Liberal/Corporate Economic System", and how it has pervasively permeated the culture. Activists should be seeking to restore economic justice by stopping the huge subsidies for the business elites and the billionaires.
3
Reagan happened. Gingrich happened. And the Hyde Amendment should never have been allowed to happen. It was the first crack in the wall. But even back then, the Democrats and feminists who were at the forefront of social change didn't quite look beyond their upper middle class bubble to really care about what happened to low income women.
6
Many things are/were illegal, Prohibition, drugs, prostitution, etc. In the end, this doesn't mean anything if there is demand. Is abortion illegal in your state? No problem. Hop a bus to NY or wherever and get it done. State government has made it illegal to obtain abortion inducing drugs even with a doctor's prescription? No problem. Your friendly neighborhood drug dealer will sell it to you and appreciates your business. Mexico has the strictest gun control laws around but that doesn't prevent the hundreds of murders that occur nor does it prevent shootouts between the cartels and law enforcement. Where there is a will, there's a way even if that way is illegal.
3
When the Supreme Court created Roe Vs. Wade, it created a divisive monster that would, in the long run, be at the heart of the current split in American society. Liberals thought they had won a victory. The Court had spoken. The battle was over. But for Pro-life people, the battle was just beginning. And the Right is a whole lot better at planning and organizing than the Left.
As this long article vividly reveals, pro-choice people never seem to grasp that Pro-life people will never give up the cause because abortion is so morally repugnant. It is not a longing for control over women's bodies, as pro-choice almost inevitably puts it, but a concern for the lives of the weakest members of society. It is a civil rights issue. Self evident. The mother has all the power in this issue, and somebody has to stand up for the powerless.
Many pro-lifers then turn out to be hypocrites, because they abandon the new-born and their mothers to their fate, with no apparent concern about what happens next.
By making themselves the official party of Abortion, the Dems are consigning themselves to perpetual defeat. Many of my good Catholic friends loathed Trump, but they felt they had to vote against Hillary and her pro-choice stance. They will follow this logic again, whoever the Dem candidate turns out to be. Trump is the monster pro-choice helped create.
6
@William Taylor. Women don't really see abortion as a battleground, whether the fight goes on in the Supreme Court, the White House, or the streets. We see abortion as a necessity, which is why the history of the procedure goes back -- way back -- to before modern medicine. And it will continue no matter what. Know your history!
5
I am a pro-life Catholic who would never vote for Trump since he is about the most non-pro life human I can imagine.
Reading these comments has left me feeling very lonely. The comments on here don’t even come close to representing me, the entirety of my Catholic pro-life beliefs or how I vote my conscious. Several comments demand to know if “pro-lifers” care about babies after they are born, victims of rape or incest or even climate change??
Of course I do! That is why I vote in line with candidates who support programs and funding and legislation that protect the dignity of all human life. Guess which side most of those are on?
Before anyone accuses me of being a “cafeteria Catholic” (you see, no one cares for me much on either side), please know I have an informed conscience and can quote Jospeh Ratzinger (a pope mind you) and the Catechism about the authority of conscience above all else...
I agree with readers who fear that Democrat purity test on extreme abortion rights will only elect Republicans, as has been the case since Roe vs Wade. Perhaps Democrats should rank order their causes. If highest ranked is climate or income equity or gun control or just non-Trumpism, then drop extreme abortion rights.
4
@Historian
Women are more than half the population.
Pregnancy is dangerous & can cause unbelievable harm to our health & our lives in general. It can KILL us.
It's callous & self-serving for other Dems to fail to recognize the importance of abortion access to ALL of America's women.
...that's before we even discuss the harm caused to unwanted children under a forced-birth scheme.
7
US "states" are islets of unequally protecting laws and legislative redundancies.
1
This article is not only about abortion rights, but the debate democrats had before the 2016 election. We assumed that because Trump was a clown and a con that america would not vote him in thus taring down more than 50 years of liberal gains against misogyny, racism and support for the disabled and children. We thought that because we cared about such things that America did as well. so we blithely went on talking and bashing each other while Trump voters planned to bring the house down. If we can't get our act together and fight for our common values rather than lose ourselves in points of order, this decay will continue and progressive values will only be a fond memory and the right o of a woman to control her own body only an out of reach talking point.
5
Evangelicals want to stop abortion.
They can.
From the pulpit.
Not for the general public.
The United States is not a recognized theocracy, it just looks like one.
10
As a life-long Democrat, I regret that we have spent virtually all our political capital for the past 45 years on the abortion issue.
This is to the detriment of other societal issues that could help so many more people than girls and women who accidentally get pregnant.
Yes, women need unlimited access to birth control and then in rare situations, legal and safe abortion up to a certain point in the pregnancy. Of course incest and rape are different situations but these are a very small percentage of abortions.
Women and their partners should to put a lot more effort into not conceiving. People in this country have come to see that abortion should not be the default and first choice in contraception.
39
@DickeyFuller the Abortion debate is about a lot more that the medical procedure for which it is named. It’s about the physical autonomy of women and their right to good medical care based on medicine NOT RELIGION.
You should be upset that the battle has raged for 45 years and now bills have been passed that will forced doctors to engage in nonexistent medical procedures, re implantation of ectopic pregnancies, or go to jail for murder; women will be investigated for miscarriages and possibly jailed. None of this is the fault of the Democratic Party. It is the fault of the GOP and religious leaders whose goal is to put women under their boot. You clearly don’t understand what is going on.
11
@DickeyFuller
The idea that abortion is the first choice in contraception is nothing less than insane.
10
@DickeyFuller
'Yes, women need unlimited access to birth control and then in rare situations, legal and safe abortion up to a certain point in the pregnancy. Of course incest and rape are different situations.'
Your intent here (I think) was to provide some guidance on perhaps a sensible way forward on this issue. But your two statements raise many questions, and I see no answers in your post.
What is a 'rare situation'? And who gets to decide what is 'rare'? Are we talking about statistical anomalies or societal trends?
'Up to a certain point in pregnancy' - again, what is this 'certain point'? And who decides what that point is - patients, doctors, or lawmakers? Let's say, for instance, we go with the latter and lawmakers get to define that 'certain point.' Let's say that lawmakers decide that abortions are illegal after six weeks of pregnancy. What happens to the woman and unborn child in a case where it's the eighth month of pregnancy, and a fetal abnormality has just been discovered that is so devastating that delivery will kill the mother, the child, or both? What if it was your wife/daughter/sister in that position? What would you then think 'up to a certain point' should mean?
'Incest and rape are different situations.' Not according to the evangelicals that are driving this. They make no distinction. Do you? If so, then you should support legal access to abortion.
It is impossible to make abortion 'rare.' It's either legal and safe, or illegal and unsafe.
6
The most evil demagoguery pushed by the anti-choice movement is the idea that those who support choice also support infanticide. I've seen commenters in this paper confused about whether New York passed a law allowing infants to be aborted at birth. Obviously this is murder, and murder is illegal, so I assume this commenters are writing in bad faith.
Unfortunately, those pro-choice people who insist that abortion should be "without restriction" feed this narrative. While abortion will never be without compromise (and Roe is a compromise) we must be aware of the opposition's propaganda. Late-term abortions are severely restricted in even the most liberal states, including New York. There are no "abortions on demand" at this stage.
It's worth remembering that botched abortions were the leading cause of death for women of childbearing age prior to Roe. Reproductive healthcare is a matter of life and death for women.
Nobody knows how many illegal abortions took place in the U.S. annually prior to Roe, but researchers put the number at between 200,000 and one million. In 2016 the CDC reports approximately 650,000 legal abortions in the U.S. Those who oppose choice on the grounds they are saving lives are mistaken because abortion rates would not necessarily change if Roe were overturned. The big change would be in maternal deaths.
50
@SandraH You said: "It's worth remembering that botched abortions were the leading cause of death for women of childbearing age prior to Roe. "
From a Washington Post article (linked below):
“Some 30 years ago it was judged that such deaths might number 5,000 to 10,000 per year, but this rate, even if it was approximately correct at the time, cannot be anywhere near the true rate now,” Tietze and Sarah Lewit wrote in Scientific American magazine in 1969. “The total number of deaths from all causes among women of reproductive age in the U.S. is not more than about 50,000 per year. The National Center for Health Statistics listed 235 deaths from abortion in 1965. Total mortality from illegal abortions was undoubtedly larger than that figure, but in all likelihood it was under 1,000.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/05/29/planned-parenthoods-false-stat-thousands-women-died-every-year-before-roe/
2
@SandraH, "The most evil demagoguery pushed by the anti-choice movement is the idea that those who support choice also support infanticide. "
But that IS the perception of the religious right and anyone who watches or listens to right wing media. It is indeed fake news, but people believe that sort of nonsense. I read it all the time in FB comments or local newspaper comments. The Pro Choice crowd needs a better PR campaign.
5
@Independent Observer
These numbers appear to be largely speculation. "It was judged" and "in all likelihood" give no evidentiary support.
1
The best way to eliminate abortion (not just legal abortion, but, you know, all abortion) is to wholeheartedly embrace the availability of safe and effective contraception.
Why, then, are most anti-abortion folks not donating generously to efforts to fund contraception?
Oh, yeah: ‘Cause it isn’t just about preventing abortion.
113
@Kathy That's false. In fact, many Republicans that are pro-life have actually promoted making "The Pill" over-the-counter while Democrats and PP are against it. Read the article below.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/06/11/i-am-a-conservative-i-agree-with-aoc-on-over-the-counter-birth-control-column/1402941001/
3
@Independent Observer
Sorry, you are deceiving us. Planned Parenthood statement from 2014: "Planned Parenthood Action Fund supports any effort to expand access to birth control, including efforts to make some forms of birth control available over-the-counter (OTC)." I believe most pro-choice people don't support OTC birth control pills, because they are not safe to use without medical supervision (I may be mistaken, but they are on prescription for a reason). On the other hand, PP and many Dems support OTC pregnancy-prevention pills that are taken within a day or two after intercourse; these have been shown to be safe enough.
8
@Kathy
Also, these same anti-choice folks also push “abstinence only” sex ed programs in schools. They are about one thing only, controlling girls and women from cradle to casket. If they were truly serious about reducing abortions then age appropriate evidence based K - 12 sex ed programs would be mandatory in all public and private schools, and birth control would be freely available without question to anyone regardless of age.
3
I have a pro-choice button with simple text that states:
"A woman's body is not public property.
Keep abortion legal."
I got it in 1982. I dug it out and I'm wearing it again.
I can't believe I'm still protesting this.
140
@L You and Sharon Wood make me wonder how many other people are also pulling out their old buttons from decades ago to support legalized abortion again.
14
@L
I still have my '70s ERA button.
It's been pinned to my kitchen bulletin board where every male who enters our home cannot fail to see it. It works as something of a talisman and a symbol that rarely fails to elicit omment all these decades later.
10
@Elizabeth Dias
I remember a button from the 2000 election that read "It's the Supreme Court, stupid."
It was and is. We lost tremendously when Bush II got to appoint Roberts and Alito.
The other fights were important but it still infuriates me that so many Bernie supporters could vote Trump, and other so called progressives threw their vote away on Stein, other 3rd party candidates and goofy write-ins because they believed the Fox garbage about Hillary Clinton and somehow managed to ignore the widely spread truth about Donald Trump.
And Gore, he was just too boring, while Nader ran around out and out lying that he was the same as Bush II.
Probably the biggest mistake of the abortion rights side was to allow the opposition to call themselves pro-life when the only life they were pro was the life of zygotes, embryos and fetuses.
But here we are having to fight the same fight we had to fight 50 years ago.
12
Hi everyone - Thank you for reading our story, and for sharing your perspective. I'm jumping into the comments to reply to some of you.
3
Very sorry to learn that the policy: abortion should be “safe, legal and rare” has been abandoned. While I endorse the rights of women to choose, I strongly believe that adoption is a very desirable option. There are many people who would like to have a child/children and can't and are in line to adopt.
Planned Parenthood is too political for abortion without restrictions. They should rename: Women's Health and emphasize that they provide a total of women's health care.
The independent clinics should be supported more; but they also should offer options like offering women to go to term to put their infant up for adoption if having the child is a human, psychological and social/survival stress.
7
@bu Anyone, whether going to a PP clinic or one of the independent for-profit clinics, can choose adoption. But those clinics aren't equipped to set themselves up as adoption centers. There are other places that already handle that.
14
@bu: Adoption can be risky for the adopter, and a form of human trafficking for ostensibly charitable agencies. Some adoptees struggle with a sense of abandonment for life.
2
Reproductive freedom and control over one’s bodily integrity against state-sanctioned violation are fundamental human rights. Moreover, since only persons can be the subjects of human rights and their protection, as long as fetal personhood remains an essentially contestable philosophical, not a scientific or religious, quandary, extending such rights to fetuses, embryos and/or conceptuses will continue to be a philosophical question resolvable only by the individual human woman whose medical care, personal, private interest and existential well-being are at stake.
22
@cafephilo0: The definition of "soul" is at issue. One side holds that it is a germ of an imaginary God implanted at fertilization, and the other holds that it is the system of coping every person develops for themselves from the experience of life after birth.
1
@Steve Bolger: I do not find your invocation of a ‘soul’ relevant to the conception of personhood, as many religious believers do. Positing a soul is hardly a sine qua non for an intelligible concept of personhood which is, like race, a social and/or philosophical construct. Conscience and moral sensibility are, of course, desirable capacities, but the evidence is ambiguous regarding the mutual roles of nature and nurture in their production.
1
DG of San Diego.
In response to your reply. I have written numerous comments to this question as to what do pro life folks do after the birth of the baby to assist both mother and child. They actually do a lot.
The Sisters of Life are very active in helping mothers find employment and offer job training for those in need. They also help them find lodging as many have no where to turn. These compassionate nuns are wonderful and never leave these women and babies alone. There are also pregnancy centers that support these people too. Some have living arrangements where they can stay so not to feel neglected. There are also individuals who are kind hearted and generous who are there for their every need.
We are so grateful that these women chose life that we now know we must not end our help once they have given birth. Pro life groups made mistakes in the past for not showing more concern for these people. We could not expect them to have their babies and just have them go it alone. Many women decide to keep their babies but if they want to place them for adoption we help them with this too. We are passionate about the pro life cause and care very much to what takes place after they deliver their babies. We learned from our mistakes in the past as we all do.
16
@KMW DO you support easy access to free/low cost birth control? Medically accurate sex education? Paid family leave? Universal healthcare? That is what reduces the abortion rate. Do your pregnancy centers have licensed medical personnel?
Do your centers provide medically accurate information?
12
It is admirable that you support women after they give birth. But when you want to take away a woman’s choice to decide whether to carry a pregnancy or not, than you are causing untold harm. It is a fact that many women will die having backstreet abortions if legal abortions are prohibited. It is also a fact that women of means will travel to where abortions are legal to end their pregnancy.
By working to make abortion illegal you are doing harm to poor women who already have very limited choice. Please continue to help pregnant women who decide to have a baby. But also, please do not take away a woman’s choice in this, a very personal decision she will live with for the rest of her life whichever way she chooses.
Let us all work to build a society where every woman will be able to have a baby without poverty, without stigma, without losing her job and without condemning herself and her child to lifelong poverty.
8
@KMW
Most concerning to liberals is using abortion as a political wedge issue, while in the same stroke demonizing programs that offer nutrition and meals to pregnant women and children. The bible first says judge not. When children need to eat and be clothed, we should just do it.
3
The Democratic Party’s focus is typically on identity-based single-issue politics while losing sight of the big picture - whoever wins the elections makes the rules. the path to victory is through the swing states whether we like it or not. Yes, abortion is an important issue, but making it front burner issue will assure a swing state loss, where the primary issues are jobs, wages and health care. Once the war is won, all of these problems can be rectified.
50
@Don What are the main issues in your community? Are you in a swing state?
6
Is that a problem of the Democratic Party’s or the Democratic voters?
2
@Don - It's Republicans who have made this a front burner issue. It's Republicans who are passing hundreds of laws restricting abortions until they're essentially unavailable. Democrats are merely fighting back and trying to protect Roe, which was and IS the compromise position.
33
The issue has always been about power -- the power of men to force women to conform to their concept of womanhood.
Personally, I find actual abortion abhorrent. But there are circumstances in which the ending of a fetus prior to survivability is necessary. The choice should be the woman's to make, in consultation with her physician, priest, pastor or family. The authority should not rest -- ever -- with state legislatures or Congress; it is none of their business.
Abortion has been a wedge political issue since before Roe v Wade. Republicans, who make up the vast majority of anti-abortionists, care nothing about the child-bearing female, their interest is in making sure that women remain in a servile, subservient position in society. That's always been the case; all the rest is noise.
82
@PaulB67 Everything shows you are wrong, the republicans support womens rights. They simply don't think anyone should have the right to an abortion. Making everything a matter of identity politics is how we are in the mess we are right now. If the left ever wants to regain the moral high ground they need to shift to "human rights" rather than "women of color" and "LGQTB etc" rights. Work on providing rights for all rather than propping up specific demographics and you will find a lot more support.
2
@ ”The issue has always been about power -- the power of men to force women to conform to their concept of womanhood“
Not really. Women, who constitute a majority of eligible voters, have voted for Republicans in large numbers since at least 1980. Christ, a majority of white women voted for trump. And then there are the scores of female legislators (and judges) who consistently support anti-choice legislation at both the state and federal levels.
Bottom line: Insofar as this is about forcing women To conform, women have only themselves to blame.
2
Life and the universe are like pendulums. Everything that swings one way ends up swinging another. Things slowly move in the direction of greater entropy over time unless energy is expended to go against that but even that in the end will fail. But for now the point is that the rights activists have to be vigilant and they will have their turn again.
When the next person on the side of the left gains power, they will be much more advantaged due to the right playing all these nasty games. So the right can laugh now but the pendulum will swing back.
8
@RamS Not if Russia has any say in it, and the Republican party, who is literally doing nothing to stop their election interference (and, in fact, is asking for it by peddling Russia's bogus Ukraine narrative).
As usual, the Democrats go too far, and create a cultural snap back. The data is clear about what the majority Americans want on abortion, which is a version of the French model. French law makes abortion legal on demand up to 12 weeks after conception, but latter abortions require two doctors to say that the abortion is needed to block grave injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman, to save mother's life, or to stop birth of a kid with a particularly severe illness recognized as incurable.
Democrats want abortion on demand well into trimester three, for any reason or no reason, at the decision of the mother. They can run on that, but they will not win.
48
@Snowball , I'd go for unrestricted abortion up to 18 weeks with later abortion exceptions for maternal health or fetal abnormalities. Along with realistic mandatory sex education and free long term contraceptives.
3
@Snowball You have forgotten that France has universal health care and that abortions are done at health clinics all over the country. That is not the model here in the United States. And so many of those abortion restrictions cause cause the abortion to go into the 2nd trimester.
And you are wrong about the 3rd trimester; only 1.3% of abortions take place after the 20th week. Those are due to fetal incompatibility with life or health of the mother.
Women are NOT having elective abortions of healthy pregnancies in the 3rd trimester. That is a blatant lie pushed by the religious right.
Why do you think you get to judge any woman's reason to have an abortion?
17
"Democrats want abortion on demand well into trimester three, for any reason or no reason, at the decision of the mother"
Literally nobody is advocating that. Provide a citation if you have one.
13
I do think more young women (and men!) need to pay attention and vote. Speaking recently to my 18 year old niece, not the most inquisitive girl, she knows very little about the issue at all, one way or another, or that the right to abortion is threatened.
18
I have two suggestions for the left if they want to be more encompassing with people who are ardent supporters of women's rights, but are conflicted on abortion. First, stop conflating support for abortion rights with support for women's rights. Right now, you can be an ardent supporter of women. You can advocate for equal pay, be in favor or the Equal Rights Amendment, condemn sexual assault support coverage for birth control and in general, and in general be a staunch feminist - whether you are male or female . But, if you happen to falter, for sincerely held moral or religious convictions and cannot, in good conscience, be a supporter of abortion rights, you are outcast, even condemned and you are unwelcome as a supporter of all other issues of importance to women. Fail that one, single litmus test - and you are gone.
Next, stop using disingenuous and even misleading euphemisms like reproductive rights. That is so ridiculously broad it could cover anything. But it is a disguise for the more honest "abortion rights". For example, my daughter had to pay $17,000 for IVF which was not covered by insurance. I have sought support for her situation among feminists, to no avail. Yet, would the phrase "reproductive rights" include the right to reproduce, if it is to be used honestly ? But, alas, reproductive rights does not really mean what it says. So, to get more support, say what you mean and don't use misleading terminology.
Stop alienating your otherwise ardent supporters.
27
@Gene Gambale Abortion is a women's rights issue. If we are not free to decide when and if to bear children, we don't have full equality.
7
How can someone be a woman’s rights supporter/feminist and not support a woman’s right to choose?
5
@Gene Gambale: No. Corporeal autonomy is a fundamental human right, and it would be protected wholsale if men bore children. If you do not support the right to abortion, you do not support women’s rights - or indeed, human rights. This is not an “issue.” It is basic freedom.
I’m fine with calling it the right to abortion.
6
Wish someone would tell me what could have been done to stop Mitch Mc Connell from ignoring historical practice in Judge Garland’s case. Many of us were outraged but I don’t know what actions could have been taken. We now realize that Democrats should have been playing the long game with state legislatures and governorships and all judicial appointments for the last 25 years. But once McConnell blocked Garland’s hearing, all traditional practices and expectations were dead.
35
If the battle for poor women (because all others could buy a plane ticket and get it done) to have free access to abortion gave us the Reagan presidency, which it certainly did, and all the ugly right-wing power plays that have brought endless wars, millions dead, and benighted right-wing leaders who have weakened democracy and destroyed the environmental movement, all of which may have been side effects, then it was NOT worth it.
10
@Andrei Foldes , although note that Democrats such as Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden voted in favor of those endless wars and, in fact, once in power, betrayed all of their promises about ending such endless wars and instead doubled and tripled-down on neo-con, intervention-first regime change actions, including in Libya, Syria, Yemen, Ukraine, etc. during the Obama-Biden presidency (when Hillary was Secretary of State). And unfortunately even so-called "progressives" like Bernie Sanders are iron-clad in support of military Keynesianism, such as Lockheed's budget-busting F-35 fighter jet and basing it in Vermont's most densely populated area, regardless of negative impact to health and home values of the very demographics the Democrats pretend to care about, including immigrant refugees, the poor, working class, etc. Democrats impeach Trump but did not impeach Reagan-Bush over Iran-Contra; nor Bush-Cheney over the lies of Iraq when millions of us worked so hard to return Congress fully to the Democrats in 2006. No, the Democrats have kicked out all of the Bobby Kennedy Democrats on issues of war and peace; as well as the Frank Church Democrats on issues of abuse of the national security state. Obama brought zero accountability when CIA Director John Brennan lied about breaking into Senate Intelligence Oversight Committee computers to undermine the torture investigation; & zero accountability when NSA Director Clapper perjured himself about mass warrantless surveillance.
2
The best way to insure the spirit of Roe, which most Americans support is not to pervert it by either extreme left or right.
What I mean by that is the right coming up with every legal loophole to outlaw none late term abortions.
On the left in states like NY (ok let's here is from the intellectualization defense mechanisms of the extreme left) making it legal to abort a viable fetus ie a decision between the doctor and woman and not the law. Any number of doctors and women will gladly abort a viable fetus.
Don't concentrate, foam at the mouth when the right passes extreme laws, ie don't pass extreme laws on the left to counter.
What to do? A democrat candidate should remind the public that he or she is for what America is for, the spirit of Roe, not extreme left or right positions.
4
@Paul - You can go online and read both the NY and VA laws that have been falsely claimed to allow abortion of a viable fetus. The NY law was intended to rectify a flaw in the previous law, which forced a woman with a non-viable fetus to carry that pregnancy to term, knowing the fetus would die in utero, endangering the mother's life, or die at or shortly after birth, to the enormous distress of the parents, accompanied in many cases by suffering of the fatally flawed newborn.
2
@MegWright thank you for your reply. However you did not disappoint me. Read my original post, you are using the defense mechanism of intellectualization.
Not only is it wrong, it threatens the spirit of Roe, just like the right's assault on any abortion threaten it also.
Learn from Lincoln. Support the majority of people who support the spirit of roe not the extremes on the left or right
1
President Trump promised he would support the pro life movement and he actually kept that promise. He is the most pro life president we have ever seen. I hope he is allowed to appoint more judges and Supreme Court justices to keep the pro life momentum going. This is something many of us never thought we would experience. It is truly amazing and wonderful. It gives us continued hope that more babies will experience life.
11
@KMW
“Amazing and wonderful”? Only for misogynists, white supremacists, authoritarians, racists, and homophobes. And the last thing this planet needs is more human babies.
Don’t kid yourself. Abortion has been around for thousands of years and is going nowhere but underground if it becomes illegal again. This time around it will be far easier to do abortions underground with the new pharmaceuticals that eliminate the need for a clinic and surgery. And crowdsourcing is really stepping up to fund travel for red state women to blue states. I’ve already contributed and will repeatedly do so in the future.
You will never win, even if you think you have. Why not focus instead on funding and distributing birth control if you want to eliminate abortion? Why not focus on getting homes for the unwanted babies and kids already born and without families? Not your problem? Then my unwanted pregnancy is not your business either.
6
@KMW Wy do yuouall call yourself "Pro-life" when you invariably support the Death Penalty and a large military? How can you make that claim when your supporters murder doctors who provide abortion and firebomb Planned Parenthood clinics that you know do not do abortions?
4
@KMW Yes, forcing girls and women who don't want to be pregnant, or for whom being pregnant may result in shunning, battery or murder, is a wonderful way for more babies to experience life - that is, if you don't care about the mother at all, or have any concern for the baby's quality of life. You never mention those aspects of this issue, KMW. Those of us who live in the real world, do. I wouldn't force my will onto you, and demand that you remain pregnant or move to Toledo because of my religious beliefs. Why do you think you have the right to interfere in my medical decisions and family planning?
5
A balance of prolife and prochoice should be the way forward to end unexpected pregnancies. One would hope that the safe and legal abortion not be the first choice for ending a life without first trying to prevent unwanted pregnancies by other means. Education and counseling should have by now restricted the need for abortions. The battle on abortion has to go beyond Roe v Wade to a compromise on 2 principles. Abortion should be legal and safe choice for women who need it. The number of abortions should be voluntarily reduced by all means possible.
13
@Girish Kotwal: Effective long term contraception should be covered for all who want it by public funding.
23
Abortion rights in this country are at a "vulnerable point." But what does that mean? It means that abortion rights for women in "red" states without the means to travel to "blue" states for abortion access are vulnerable. It also probably means that the GOP/Putin's ability to systematically dismantle democracy in this country is equally as vulnerable. For if "red" America is allowed to go forced-birther, I strongly predict the end of the right's hyper-antimajoritarian power structure will quickly follow suit.
10
@Jake Reeves: This issue is the cutting edge of theocracy. God is the foundation of immovable opinions.
6
Since states can pass at least some restrictions, the battle for abortion everywhere is lost. Organizations must prepare to help women get to states where abortion is legal and available.
This means raising money for doctors, travel, accommodations, etc.
Thank goodness we have enough states where this is possible. I await the fund-raising.
10
The underlying premises of this otherwise thoughtful discussion are wrong. Abortion is not a left-right, liberal-conservative issue: in fact, there are many who would on other issues be considered “liberal” who are abhorred by abortion while there are just as many “conservatives” who likewise champion abortion rights. Indeed, until the Roe decision came down abortion’s strongest opposition came from the left-leaning New Deal Democrats whereas abortion rights were promoted by such prominent right-leaning GOP leaders as Cal. Gov. Ronald Reagan, NY Gov. Nelson Rockefeller and 1964 GOP presidential candidate Barry Goldwater. (See DK Williams, Defenders of the Unborn: History of the Pro-life Movement.)
The problem as I see it is that the “pro-choice left” has embraced the extreme, thus alienating a large swath of voters who would otherwise share their positions on other issues.
The simple fact is that every abortion results in the taking of a human life; a fact that the pro-choice side has consistently refused to engage, instead clinging to the arbitrary distinction concerning personhood and constitutional rights. Unless and until the Democrats acknowledge this and engage in the debate—which will ultimately require compromise on both side—they will continue to lose at the ballot box.
28
@WFP
You said it better than I could have. This is a losing issue for the left. Another poster commented that 70% of Americans support abortion rights. Which is only partly true: 70% of Americans support SOME abortion rights. The position of the left today is unrestricted access to abortion up to the moment of birth (see the proposed VA law from this year). They would allow any woman to abort a child for any reason right up until the moment they take their first breath. It’s sickening.
That and the fact that this just isn’t a voting issue for the left. In 2000 and 2016 the right saw opportunities to make gains on the Supreme Court, and i guarantee your every single pro-life supporter voted Bush or Trump those years. Meanwhile, facing the same prospect, large proportions of the left voted for candidates with absolutely no chance of winning, and in doing so handed 4 Supreme Court seats to the right.
This just isn’t a winning political issue for the left. And nobody seems to realize that.
14
@WFP You say "The simple fact is that every abortion results in the taking of a human life..." Wrong. Not simple. Not a fact.
We can't have a rational discussion if you don't understand the complicated facts.
Pregnancy can take a mother's life. Giving birth can take a woman's life. How come you don't care about those lives? Why do you care more about a fetal potential for life than a woman who is already living? That's the simple fact that doesn't make sense to people who are pro-choice...
6
@WFP It’s simple, really: If you don’t want an abortion, don’t have one. That’s your choice.
4
The power to give or take away a life is larger than us. It cannot be demeaned by a legal system created by us.
The left lost the issue the day it made it about woman rights. Most Americans who believe in a greater power do not take that myopic view,
The issue cannot be decided by the judiciary or settled in our courts. It is far more powerful than that.
5
@Bhaskar The judiciary and the courts are the same but perhaps you meant the legislature. It can and it will be.
1
@Bhaskar Your god applies only to you. And it most certainly is about women's rights. Our right to bodily autonomy; our right to decide when and if to bear children.
If you don't like abortion , don't have one. Don't force your religious views on anyone else.
4
@Bhaskar Anyone who believes in a "greater power" is wrong. It is up to humans and us humans alone to determine right and wrong. This means that life , though valuable, is not sacred. The issue sets one value against another. Furthermore under our system of government the courts determine the legality of laws so it absolutely is up to them. There is no "more powerful" unless one group is willing to use violence against to change our system of government and succeeds. Not going to happen.
3
I'm not sure the challenges to reproductive rights and the spate of awful legislation now being passed has much to do with anything in this article. I could be wrong but I think the problems are much more macro-political. The nation is divided largely on broad partisan lines that include issues like climate change, gun violence, income inequality and racism. I don't know that reproductive rights alone drives the bus in terms of how people vote.
As a separate matter, at the margin, our people just don't vote or vote smart consistently enough. Look at the people who stayed home because they didn't like Clinton or who were not enthused by her, or who voted for Jill Stein or who don't vote in off years. People like Colin Kaepernick don't vote because he perceives no difference between the candidates. Overall, these folks are small in number but, as we well know, just large enough to give Trump a small margin in 3 states.
We also have steadfastly managed to overlook that we need the Senate and that requires winning in states that are centrist or center right. I have seen too many pieces talking about how demography is destiny that fail to acknowledge that we elect Senators and the President on a state basis, not by national elections. We also missed the threat of GOP gerrymandering in 2010 and were essentially cheated out of Democratic seats in state legislatures and Congress.
Not saying the issues in this article aren't real, just that they may not be causal.
2
@David - The issue of Senators is skewed by the fact the founders allowed only 2 senators per state, regardless of the state's population. If CA had the same level of senatorial representation as WY, for example, CA would have over 100 senators.
In 2016, Senate Democrats got 20 million more votes than Senate Republicans, yet Republicans kept the majority. In 2018, when Democrats had to defend 25 senatorial seats, they got "only" 11.5 million more votes than Republicans, and Republicans gained more seats. It's not that Democrats don't come out to vote for their Senators, it's that the system is so skewed in favor of smaller, more rural states that we're guaranteed government by the minority.
1
I am not a woman. If I were pregnant and had a baby was not married or could not feed or educate the person what what I do. I would probably go to a doctor and ask for an abortion. I wouldn’t want that person brought up by other people. I wouldn’t want that child in foster homes. And then later search to see if I could find that person! Today if people don’t adopt babies they certainly don’t want to adopt Older clients.
Some mothers who can’t have children want to adopt babies. That is fine for me. There are so many unwanted babies today, go for it.
That decision is not easy. Yet if planned parenthood was around which gives out free condoms. The activity that caused this baby to be born, would not be born.
The Prime Minister of Ireland is Catholic. He supports abortion. Ireland supports abortion. Ireland is no longer Catholic.
12
As a man I will perhaps be accused of not fully understanding abortion. I’ll confess: my wife and I had such a difficult time getting pregnant, even resorting to IVF, that the thought of abortion is unconscionable to me. This is not to say I believe in banning it. I tend to agree with Hillary. Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.
.
Right now, Pro Choice Americans need to come to grips with the fact that abortion may be made illegal once again. And we need to think seriously about how this will go down, if it does. We need to stop talking just about abortion rights and start talking more about the things the so-called “pro life” crowd tends to scoff at: quality schools, children’s and family healthcare, safe air for them to breathe and safe water for them to drink, quality jobs when they grow up. We should bruise these wanna-be “pro lifers” as much as we can, and we should at least get them to agree to ALOT more funding for public schools and children’s healthcare if they manage to ban abortion.
.
Remember: If you’re really Pro Life you should agree that every Life should be lived to its fullest. If you don’t, you can hardly be called pro life. You’re pro birth and that’s all.
21
I'm not sure that doubling down on the strength of the base is a good idea. I'm a firm believer in the right to an abortion, but I will never share the conviction of someone who thinks it is murder. It's really hard to take a moderate position in the face of such extremism, but I just don't see "political rights" having the same shock and awe power as "infanticide".
4
Very, very unfortunate as this is one of the last remaining and most important reasons left to vote for the Democratic Party.
Unfortunately, the Democrats decided to kick out all the Bobby Kennedy Democrats on issues of war and peace in order to capitulate to the military-industrial complex; to kick out all of the Frank Church Democrats on issues of the CIA, NSA and national security state abuse and overreach; and to kick out all of the Barbara Jordan Democrats on issues of immigration reform. And they have kicked out all of the Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. Democrats on issues of the American Creed to instead embrace a hodgepodge of extremist identity politics and political correctness.
Having done that, while there are still people who are rightly motivated to vote Democrat because of the importance of pro-choice matters, it has become much harder for the Democrats to assemble a winning coalition at the Presidential level (and in the US Senate).
5
@GRH Oh, so Obama winning in 2016-2018 by record numbers (esp. 2008) and then Clinton winning just prior to Bush 2 - flukes?
The Senate is an issue. It is undemocratic. But you're wrong about the Democrats. I don't even like them that much but I think
The few issues voters are the Republican ones. Abortion/Religion. Military/Gun rights. Money. What else are Republicans for?
@RamS ,Obama's record win in 2008 was great thing but was based on a campaign that pretended he & Biden were different than Bush-Cheney and were going to end the wars based on lies & the neo-con, intervention first regime change style foreign policy. And Obama's opponents were even more hawkish. So Obama was able to attract "Bobby Kennedy" style Democrats (who'd opposed Vietnam War) & "Frank Church" Democrats because he pretended like he was going to change Bush-Cheney foreign policy & also that he was going to restrain the growing national security state. His actual governance was mostly opposite of this. With exception of Tulsi Gabbard, 2020 Democratic candidates not appealing to this former element of Democrats' coalition.
Clinton's wins in 1992 & 1996, that was when Democrats still had room for Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. type Democrats who believe/d in the American Creed; and Barbara Jordan type Democrats on immigration reform (in fact, Ms. Jordan was President Clinton's appointed leader of the Bipartisan Immigration Reform Commission, before he shamefully betrayed her and her recommendations months after she died in 1996). Also, Bill Clinton governed mostly as a "peace" dividend president, in the wake of the end of the Cold War on foreign policy.
All I am saying is the trend the last 6 or 7 years has been disturbing because the Democratic Party has needlessly been unwinding its coalition, such that they could lose to someone as demented as Trump to begin with.
On the abortion issue, the victims are, as they have always been, women and poor. Particular religious sects are one side of the abortion issue and the other side is the one struggling to uphold legal rights, civil rights and human rights among millions of women, largely poor.
15
It's important that this article was written. Many will likely gain a better understanding of the situation which is disgraceful. Too bad Bloomberg, or some of the other billionaires, can't shower donations on clinics that provide abortions, contraception and family planning counseling.
As for an electrician who won't lend a hand because he's anti-abortion, I hope that no woman he knows ever needs to have a baby because some judge in Washington. Women must have a right to choose.
10
I have been following this story for close to a decade and have been asking the same question since day one: Where are the Democrats - up to and including President Obama? There was and still is virtually no outcry from our "progressive" leaders.
4
Who is having abortions, and why? I want to know more.
An abortion, especially past 10 or 12 weeks, is not a trivial matter. I support early abortion and abortion in all the complicated situations (rape, seduction of teens, complications in the health of the mother or fetus). But I don’t support it for any reason at any stage. We know now, through ultrasound, that fetuses really are babies after five or six months — they look like us and act like us; they can feel pain.
Except in cases of rape, a pregnancy isn’t something that just “happens” to someone either. You have sex, you risk pregnancy. Either accept the risk (a real option for adult, loving monogamous couples who might only rely on one birth control method), or don’t have sex . . . or possibly use iron-clad birth control (generally, in young people understood to be a hormonal method or IUD with condoms, every time).
Alabama’s abortion law is ridiculous and probably will be tragic. But feminists “shouting” an abortion that was necessary because of, say, trivial bad planning on the part of an educated and financially astute forty year old [I read that article] is gross and immoral.
Sometimes I think the left just wants on demand abortion for any reason so that they can live the Dream of everyone being utterly independent of each other and able to have no obligations sex without the fetters of monogamy.
8
@C A fetus is not a baby. A fetus depends on a woman for oxygen and everything else needed for life. A baby gets oxygen by breathing and can get food from anyone. That's my definition and it's as good as anyone else's.
3
If Roe v Wade is overturned by the existing supreme court, women will simply resort to back rooms and clothes hangers as they have done in the past. Of course many will die but the hypocritical evangelicals will glory in their professed sanctity.
Of course this article fails to mention that Henry Hyde was himself an adulterer who probably enjoined his mistress to have abortions to cover his extra marital activities.
One consolation is that what one SCOUS decides another SCOUS can just as easily reverse.
6
i fully support a woman's right to choose. I am 65, white. male. I am a Progressive Liberal.. grew up Conservative.
Here is the only question.
What we will WE ALL Sacrifice to continue to LOSE on the Abortion battle. McConnell beat us with the long game. The Federalist Society beat us with the long con.
Do we sacrifice my wife and my Social Security and Medicare we paid into for over 45 years?
Never.
Do we sacrifice our homes because tax benefits are stripped and given to millionaires?
Never.
Maybe it is better to let the National Abortion issue go; and support women getting abortions in NY and California where they will always be legal.
Winning back our Democracy from the Russian and wealthy supported GOP in the White House and Congress can be our only goal.
No more identity politics and cancel politics. I am not personally responsible for the transgressions against you.
We can't have a great future litigating our past sins.
6
@George Jackson Completely agree George.
We have literally blown all of our political capital for over 45 years on two issues:
abortion, and
gay rights.
What percentage of the population is either gay or carrying an unwanted pregnancy? 10%?
In defending these issues for 10% of the citizens, Democrats have given up on all the social justice issues that affect 80+% of the citizens.
I am tired of it. I agree that we should just let the abortion issue go. If we could distribute free contraception to everyone on demand, and teach more sex education, we would not have millions of unwanted pregnancies.
@George Jackson Mcconnell "beat us" because our obsolete constitution gives as many senators to a small largely rural state, one with less than one million people, as to California with 40 million. Thus the Senate is extremely unrepresentative of our population. If this were not the case Trump could not have appointed hard right supreme court justices, regardless of anything else in our politics.
The right should be careful what it wishes for. If abortion gets outlawed they will mobalize the left, esp women, just as Roe energized evangelicals.
Add that to fired up climate change voters + fired up gun safety voters + fired up black lives matter voters + fired up me too voters and the right will be looking at a pretty uphill landscape.
And finally add the fact that less educated white voters are dying at higher rates cuz their states turned down O- care and i' d say the future looks pretty grim for the right.
No wonder they play dirty on judges and voter suppression.....
12
Three months, six months, weeks, days. My mother, poet that she is, said apropos of this question: abortion ought be legal until the mother can feel the kicks from the womb.
2
Ireland just had a referendum on abortion and voted overwhelmingly, almost 70-30%, for its legalization. I suspect that if America held a similar referendum, the results would be the same. And yet we have a religious faction that sees this cause as a black-and-white issue. "Life is life, and truth is truth," one such person told me yesterday. The 61-year-old Catholic explained there is no room for debate on the issue. You can't change a mind like that.
Interestingly, though, I don't see this SCOTUS overturning Roe v Wade. As with the gay marriage question, they seem only to want to follow public opinion on cultural issues. If they do overturn it, we will see the same mess we saw in pre Roe v Wade and in Ireland, with groups and volunteers bringing women across state lines, or with the online market for Plan C pills increasing. This fight will never end.
71
@Eric: This court is in deliberate denial that laws enforcing faith-based beliefs are prohibited by the "Establishment Clause" of the first amendment.
16
@Eric The difficulty I see with your argument and that of many abortion-rights supporters is that you are trying to make this a religious issue when it is not: it is a human rights issue. Indeed, there are many opponents to abortion whose position is grounded in religious beliefs. There are many non-religious/irreligious/atheistic people, as well, who also oppose abortion as the unjust taking of a unique human life.
Dismissing pro-lifers with slogans about keeping one's rosaries off another's ovaries is a dishonest way of avoiding the real issue. And until that is engaged with honestly and sincerely the pro-choice side is going to continue playing a losing hand.
5
@WFP
There are also pro-choice people who support legal abortion for religious reasons, such as the sanctity of human life.
The article about the project to construct a chronological dictionary of Latin over the duration of the Roman empire in today's Times was most interesting to me. Little did I know of it. Language encodes our cultural memory. The meanings of words evolve, while the words of laws are fossilized.
3
As with many of our laws and regulations, what they mean is often what the court system deems them to be.
The enormous failing of our legislative system is that the Legislative Branch does not update the existing laws when it becomes clear how the Judicial branch is interpreting them, and how the progressive and conservative judges are expressing their opinions. With contentious or poorly written legislation, it's just a matter of time until an unwanted outcome becomes generally enforced in specific places (states). This is just an example of the larger failing of the Legislative Branch as it has generally abdicated its identity and constitutional duties.
One can only hope that those people in conservative states where abortion is prohibited wake up to the more liberal laws in a nearby progressive state and replace their political "bums" with ones who share their views.
Very unfortunately, this scenario also presents a view where the contrast is so stark that it could result in even greater polarization.
5
@Cruise Cycle: The Supreme Court is the single most important arbiter of the meanings of words in the US, and it is doing a very erratic job of it, in my opinion.
2
@Cruise Cycle: This utterly dishonest Supreme Court will not address legislative misinterpretation of "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". None of these justices were even asked what an "establishment of religion" is during their vetting process.
2
If young women want access to full reproductive healthcare services, then young women are going to have to get to work.
Reproductive health care is BASIC healthcare for 50% of the population.
It is not a FRILL or a GIFT that women should have to beg right-wing politicians or religious leaders for.
Get to work young women.
96
@EK: This is an endless fundraising issue demonstrating how incapable this nation is to decide anything that can be used for fundraising.
1
@EK
Such a disservice to say this is a young woman's issue. Everyone in the country benefits when women are free to make their own informed decisions about child-bearing; think of how much misery could be avoided, since we care little about our nation's children once they're born.
Also, if you only sit back and watch, you're saying that only the freedoms you see as directly touching your life matter. If so, be assured the rest will be taken away from you, too; reproductive rights are just one piece of the plan.
4
Bravo to these courageous woman fighting on the front lines in tough places for the rights of women to choose.
52
Pro life groups have become very well organized and kept the focus on abortion. They have not taken their eye off the ball. Some groups have even gone door to door to convey that abortion is the taking of innocent human life in the womb. Many young people have taken up this very important cause as those who have canvassed neighborhoods to get out this message. It has resonated with many today and we are seeing more and more people are taking a pro life position.
Pro life groups were slow to come to the movement but their fast pace has only accelerated. There has been strength in numbers which shows you can achieve success when you put your mind to a very important cause. For many this is one of the most important issues of the day and a civil rights issue as well. We want to save our young from the terrible fate of abortion and have been quite successful. We still have our work cut out for us and will never give up this very important cause. Babies lives and the lives of the mother are at stake. We cannot rest on our laurels.
4
Yes, it is one of the most important issues of the day. My reproductive rights should not be tampered with. Not you, or anyone else should decide for me or any other women the best course of action in the event of an unwanted pregnancy.
17
@KMW
So, in going door-to-door, are you and your activist kin also providing detailed information on the choices available to both women and men with respect to birth control? Are you also providing information with respect to where they might go to receive medically accurate information on sex and sexuality? Resting on laurels? More likely a bed of thorns, for without accurate information, how can one possibly make an informed choice? Sadly, what you're pointing to is a system that will ultimately make this country look like, say, El Salvador where women can be imprisoned for miscarriages and stillborn births.
12
@KMW A fetus is not a baby. Period.
4
This public debate should have been settled long ago. A woman's body is her own and no one else's. The Supreme Court has made this human right for women into the law of the land because it makes moral sense. If you oppose abortion, don't have one. Don't force your beliefs on someone else. Abortion is a personal, private choice between a woman and her doctor. The people will make sure this line is held.
206
@Tony
You assume that abortion isn't a form of murder. But others disagree, strongly and strongly believe that murder is not a "personal, private choice." States have always (thank goodness) prohibited and punished murder. Each State should decide what constitutes murder in its jurisdiction and that is appropriate. Some States will prohibit abortions as murder. Others will not prohibit abortions because they deem it to not be murder. So be it. That's federalism and democracy.
1
@Robert Atkinson
There is a sect in India that believes killing any insect is murder so they wear masks lest they inadvertently breath in gnats.
Just because someone has for religious reasons decided something is murder does not make it so.
Once you go down the path of deciding any human cell or group of human cells is equal to a human being, you can no longer justify "killing" cancer cells or tumors or cutting fingernails. And please don't argue potential because with the advances in cell biology we will soon be at the point where any human cell could potentially become a human being under the right circumstances.
5
It is illegal to sell your own body parts. Prostitution is also illegal. Two examples of government having control of what we can do with our own bodies, male or female. The question of abortion is a moral question, not necessarily a religious question. You either believe is moral or inmoral, natural or un-natural, a right or not a right. Laws are a reflection of the morals and ethics of society. Not the other way around. Abortion is a hard topic because there are no iron clad premises on either side.
This is a well-researched and well-written piece that was more than eye-opening for me. As a previous supporter of both the Yellowhammer Fund and Planned Parenthood, I am surprised at how little of the funding raised has trickled down to the providers and patients. As a woman of color, I have been wary of Democratic candidates that speak the Twitter sound bytes of “wokeness” from the comfort of their own privilege, without truly understanding the issues impacting people of color or those in poverty. I am disheartened to see this (the privileged setting the tone for the conversation) playing out on the issue of abortion, at a time when the Court is tilting conservative and Justice Ginsburg is 86. Please publish a follow up article on how we can funnel our support directly to these clinics.
30
As a pro life woman, I do not think they are losing the abortion battle fast enough. Those of us in the pro life movement want us to see fewer abortions and not more. Planned Parenthood wants more abortions because this is where they make the most money.
The pro life movement has made tremendous strides and will not ever give up. We have time and support on our side. We have seen many more pro life causes than ever before. As we succeed, we only see our numbers grow. It is so encouraging. We will never give up the battle.
11
@KMW Serious question. Why is the life of an unborn child worth more than the life of the person being forced to bear it? Are anti abortion, anti birth control people motivated to do anything for those babies after they are born to a parent that didn't want or cannot care for a child?
29
@KMW - The majority of PP clinics don't even offer abortion at that location. Of the 25 PP clinics closed in TX, only 4 offered abortion services. And no, PP doesn't make money on abortions. First of all, they're a non-profit group, and secondly, every abortion costs PP more than they charge for it. They charged patients on a sliding scale according to income, with the portion the patient doesn't pay being covered by donations. I know it's hard for you to understand, but PP doctors and clinic workers see the desperation of many women, especially poor women, when faced with giving birth to a child they're in no position to support, nurture, or care for.
Since the forced birthers generally oppose making contraception free and widely available, and seemingly support the political party that actively works to reduce or eliminate the safety net programs that might give an unwanted, unaffordable child half a chance at a decent life. it takes a lot of nerve to insist on forcing every pregnancy to come to term, with zero regard for the fate of that unwanted child born to a mother who'll most likely resent, neglect, abuse, and sometimes torture and kill it.
21
@KMW You're just pro-birth and the pro-rights crowd will never give up too and everything "won" will be lost again and again.
Already people have figured out how to have abortions via a pill. Soon technology will make abortions easy as pie and then this battle will be pointless.
4
Abortion isn’t the issue and never has been. It’s always been about control—a man’s control over a woman’s body; her choices; her life; her self. The hard right has been winning this culture war since Reagan was elected with the aid of the evangelical bloc.
Now, with Mitch McConnell in the Senate loading up the federal judiciary with anti-choice judges, pro-lifers find themselves under siege; unfortunately for them, even a Donald Trump defeat next November won’t be enough to turn back the tidal wave of conservative judges. Republicans have what they want: an emotionally-charged issue front and center next year and an expected boost from a right-leaning Supreme Court next June.
Until gerrymandering and stacked courts are addressed, anti-abortion forces are having it all their own way. This has nothing to do with religion; it’s all about control.
And the right has plenty of it.
162
@Red Sox, ‘04, ‘07, ‘13, ‘18 : Now is it getting to be not only a man's control over a woman's body but the far right religious extremists demand for control over a woman's body.
22
Completely on point. This is the struggle, who controls women's bodies.
(
6
Many men support abortion. It is a great way to get out of a bind if you get a woman pregnant. Or a father forcing a daughter to have an abortion and get rid of the problem. In many ways, legalized abortion has been a blessing for men also. I do not think that I follow your logic.
1
Control of resource extraction and control of women’s reproductive rights are how religions/states have kept kept societies functioning in order to continually expand growth.
Post-agricultural revolution and post-industrial revolution societies always needed more workers/soldiers/consumers. But we have now entered the digital revolution. It’s time we stop with the old expansion mindsets.
If we are to thrive on this planet (with finite resources), we need to give women control of their reproductive rights.
Melinda Gates, who works with women in Africa, says the most effective way to improve people’s lives there is to give women control of their reproductive rights.
I’m willing to live with a smaller pension if the birth rate lowers here in North America. Are you?
28
Actually, birth control was the norm before monotheism. There is nothing natural about men controlling women's bodies.
5
I struggle with how abortion has become such a dividing political topic. If you are conservative, you must be against abortion. If you are democrat, you must be pro. My issue is that I clearly identify myself as democrat, and yet I am against abortion. Once a child has been conceived, I do believe they have a right to live just like the mother. It is an unfair biological reality for women (I am a woman) but guess what, life is unfair. I could go on and on for debate's sake, but within the context of the article I think that democrats are getting boxed into this topic. Some abortion laws in democrat states do raise doubts, and you can't really take the moral high ground when you are arguing and campaigning for human life to be suppressed. And I am not sure if we are really on the "right side of history" here - in a world where we are becoming more sensitive to how we treat animals and the environment, where exactly is there a place for allowing abortions? It's not a political thing for me, it is a moral one, and for many people it is the same. And morals, for some, do come before politics. And here lies the danger in my opinion in pursuing a positions that most people are deeply conflicted about
63
@Erica
If that's how you feel about a fetus, then don't get an abortion. It's really simple.
Your morality is not mine. We are suffering from overpopulation as it is. Each child consumes more and more resources we are unable to provide without inflicting damage on the planet.
I want women to have the children they want to have. Unprotected sex might happen, or sex may be forced, or birth control may fail which may result in a clump of cells being removed from the uterus. I have no problem with that. That clump of cells is not a living being.
This is about religion, not morality. Don't inflict your morals or your religion on me. This is a secular nation.
116
@CF That argument doesn't work. You are talking to people who see a human life.
25
@Erica One can be against abortions and also be pro-choice. Making abortions illegal will not stop abortions. Wealthy women will fly to someplace where abortion is still legal and poor women will go back to coat hangers or illegally imported morning after pills. Those against abortion would be more successful at stopping abortion if instead of blindly voting for crooked politicians who promise to make abortion illegal, they were to demand laws that make it less economically onerous to have a child. Laws such as health care reform, free preschool, family leave policies, accessible birth control and quality sexual education. Ironically, these are the exact same policies that "pro life" organizations fight so hard against.
34
Ms Wood distilled the issue to its core: "I know so many people who said they woke up when Trump was elected. Well, they shouldn’t have been asleep."
Though gender (mostly) insulates me from having a personal stake in the matter, I have always been convinced that individual reproductive choice is right on principle, not subject to meddling by deluded parochial factions on a mission to impose their dysfunctional values on others.
Ms Wood shines an unforgiving spotlight on the fatal flaw of many who call themselves "progressive": their political awareness leaps from one presidential election to the next. Once they have elected someone they like, they congratulate themselves, then quickly lose interest, thinking I suppose that the problem has been solved for all time. Besides, they have better things to do, they have a life.
Regressives, though, have no life to speak of. They just grit their teeth, and keep chugging with determination. While those fair weather "progressives" are too busy with other things to notice, regressives run for local offices, and win state legislatures, from where they can easily disenfranchise their opponents by gerrymandering. And when a fluke puts a Bush (Thomas, Roberts, Alito) or a Trump (Gorsuch, Kavanaugh) into the White house, they build a right-wing Supreme Court which will eventually, bit by bit, deconstruct reproductive rights.
The minority party in the US dominates American politics not by merit, but by doggedness, while our side sleeps.
8
Another few decades and Democrats will learn you need to continuously fight rearguard actions to combat regression by the GOP. It’s the only way to ensure progress stays done. Check out the regular attacks on social security. Every election should include preserving it as a plank.
13
"Going moderate is not a winning strategy." Indeed. Abortion activists and pro-choice advocates must come together in unison, put forth a coalition of many parts becoming one whole and forceful entity with one goal: No person, no group - and certainly no political and/or religious one - should be allowed to take away the fundamental right which a woman has over her own body. The mere actions, the audacity, the judgement, and hypocritical philosophies of those who deny the need for abortions are nothing less that robbing a woman of her dignity and worth to choose what is best for herself. So what is the solution? There are many. As this piece points out, complacency is not a consideration. It is what led us getting into this mess now, along with the rise of evangelicalism. Our Democratic candidates for POTUS must make this an issue. They must speak beyond what is a woman's individual choice. Again, as this essay points out, they must talk in terms of health services that are needed and most necessary for the complexity of reproductive health, from yearly mammograms and PAP smears, to yearly physicals with lab tests, and the availability of counseling. I truly hope that enough people and certainly those aspiring to be the next president heed this fine essay.
3
There is a settled federal case that has been under attack through America's greatest tool to control others, state's rights. It's been used to disenfranchise minorities and others and through political action by religious groups used to insert religious beliefs into law.
14
Planned Parenthood doesn't organize. They don't play nice with their supporters, instead they attempt to mobilize by asking for people to show up for a photo op with a pink scarf or their ready-made sign. They also haven't worked well with grassroots organizers, reproductive justice groups and exclude women of color. I have faith that the need for abortion care will push women to continue this fight but I think PP is an obstacle and honestly wish they'd step out of the way.
3
@SarahB, can you expand a little on your comment? I find it fascinating because this isn't my experience with Planned Parenthood locally, which includes many women of color and is very supportive of reproductive justice.
One important consideration--mentioned in this article--is that Planned Parenthood is the only pro-choice organization large enough to take states to court, thus providing legal support for independent clinics. If PP didn't assume this role, there is no comparable entity to step in its shoes. I think the anti-choice side would like nothing better than to see supporters of choice attack Planned Parenthood.
Are you saying that PP in Cambridge doesn't work well with grassroots organizers?
Since when is democracy synonymous with tyranny of the majority? I am not the first to say that pregnancy, abortion, or masturbation, gender identity and suicide, for that matter, are an individual’s decision and only hers (his as the case may be). Abortion is and should always be a fundamental right, not to be argued about, used for political gain or to meet the criteria of any particular group, no matter how large. If we can tell a woman when, how or why she can have an abortion (the argument is always that the fetus is a human being) then we should be able to tell her how to feed, clothe, educate her children as these are also about the child ‘s life. Or is there a difference between ending a pregnancy and killing a person over a period of weeks, months or years after having made bad decisions on feeding, education or other aspects of rearing a child?
3
With a SCOTUS bench now leaning to the right, the future for reproductive freedom in the U.S. is undeniably grim. Abortion used to be an issue of liberty: not politics, not religion. It was an issue of whether the government should intervene with a woman’s liberty to do what she wants with her body, until today. This is what we, as a civilized democracy, need to protect. Roe is a constitutional right for Americans and to deny that is to strip away the liberty SCOTUS judges rendered legitimate in 1973.
4
@Yung - If in fact SCOTUS decides to return the abortion decision to the states (which is what i'd expect them to do other than overturning Roe v Wade completely), it may be a pyrrhic victory for the forced birth contingent. I can't think of a better way to galvanize support for Democrats at all level of government, and abandonment of the GOP.
2
Planned Parenthood doesn't organize. They don't play nice with their supporters, instead they attempt to mobilize by asking for people to show up for a photo op with a pink scarf or their ready-made sign. They also haven't worked well with grassroots organizers, reproductive justice groups and exclude women of color. I have faith that the need for abortion care will push women to continue this fight but I think PP is an obstacle and honestly wish they'd step out of the way.
2
@SarahB
And then what?
The cruel irony that this battle will hang on the votes of two “justices “ with clear records of contempt for women is no accident.
The movement is not about saving fetuses/babies. If it were, there would be concern for the fertilized eggs routinely destroyed in fertility clinics. If it were, there would be concern about pregnant girls and women being held in unhealthy environments at our borders. If it were, there would be support for new mothers to be to encourage healthy births as opposed to abortion.
In the hypocritical American “Right to Life” movement there are no efforts to actually preserve life, only to control women by regulating their bodies. Women’s health, welfare and lives are easily discarded in this single misogynistic goal.
This is not not a moral or Christian cause. This is not about babies, who we miserably fail to protect once born. This is not about justice.
This is oppression. Let’s not ever pretend otherwise.
149
Thank you so much for this important reporting. I'd like to donate to the West Alabama Women's Center to support the important services they provide, but their website doesn't have a donation link. Would it be possible for the New York Times to add an update on how people could donate to small clinics and bypass larger national organizations like Planned Parenthood?
14
When a political system allows the minority of a country to dictate its will to the majority, you have a very serious problem.
I hope that liberal states challenge by any mean possible the conclusion that the Republican Court will eventually come to, the repeal of Roe. Tumultuous times...
15
The philosophical view point of women guiding and choosing their own destiny is vital to maintaining access and right to have an abortion without someone you neither know nor give a hoot about dictating you cannot have one.
The emotions and vicious promotion of their opinions of those who oppose any choice at all is making a more moderate, but nearly as oppressive, group seem like an acceptable group to negotiate with. I think it is be design to continue to erode total choice by the woman up until the time of delivery, or at least survivabilty outside the womb.
Science, which has improved tremendously, is also (no surprise) being marginalized when it comes to forming a policy for women's access to services, basically because it does not fit with the opponents. Yet common sense where some frothing at the mouth defender of a bunch of cells which doesn't even look like a creature yet, is saying she or he thinks should have more say than an already here, with feelings, history and independent decision, must take a back seat to letting the rest of her life be governed by strangers.
It is indeed time to stand up and be persistent, and if that is beginning to fail, make sure that private internet access to delivery of safe medications without the do-gooders having any knowledge is easy to find, and works flawlessly.
4
Democrats could have easily prevented the current controversy about abortion. They could have passed a national law that permitted abortions on demand at any time during a pregnancy, without regard to the age or competency of the girl or woman. They could have further required that states not block abortions and that the Federal government pay all costs of abortions. Why didn’t Democrats do this during the first two years Obama was President? The bill would have sailed through Congress.
6
I've been frustrated for years with young women blithely ignoring the reproductive peril they're in. I see many reasons for their subliminally induced human rights slumber, beginning and ending with a hyper-sexed industrial complex that targets them from toddler to teen and beyond. They are not woke. They don't want to know what's happening. Knowing and speaking about it would be unfeminine. They won't know what the old crones were fighting for until they've lost their most basic human right completely, and by then it'll be too late.
17
@DMS
As a group they cannot identify with us old crones that were instructed by the church, even a non member ,that their responsibility was to have children, no matter the health of the child, mother or other potential consequences. I, for one was blessed when birth control became available, and thanked God-my Doctor.
Maybe they will recognize the potential for that dominance to return, and stop it in it's tracks.
6
I was a volunteer for Planned Parenthood for many years, but I resigned a few months ago because of exactly what this article talks about. I came to help women who need health care services. But, as the recent leadership changes indicated, what the organization became about is liberal politics. Many of our patients are anti-abortion themselves but need cancer tests, birth control, or even abortion. We need to treat them with compassion but not force political views on them. Otherwise, clinics just keep closing and women who hold different views won’t even come to get healthcare there any more.
NARAL is a great group and needs to do more politically. Keep Planned Parenthood as a health provider for all women, don’t make it the face of liberal politics.
93
@Maria Santangelo, I've also volunteered for Planned Parenthood and have a daughter who works at a clinic. Politics aren't discussed at the clinic, which is open to women, men and children. Many women seeking abortions are strongly anti-abortion, and are treated with compassion and respect, and without judgment. No one demands that these patients change their views; if a provider or volunteer did, they would be asked to leave.
We fall into the opposition's trap when we divide ourselves. Both NARAL and Planned Parenthood are good non-profits supporting women's reproductive rights.
44
@Maria Santangelo Thanks for sharing. I'm curious -- did you ever share your concerns with the leaders at the clinic where you volunteered? What did they think of the issue?
8
@Maria Santangelo - You write:
" Many of our patients are anti-abortion themselves but need cancer tests, birth control, or even abortion."
So, many of these patients who are anti-abortion come in needing/wanting an abortion themselves. Yet they think they have the right, and should have the authority to deny anyone else the choice. And the key word here is choice.
But I'll add another one - hypocrite. Do as I say, not as I do.
I have zero right or desire to make such a choice for anyone else. And no one, has the right to make such a decision for me. Ever. No one.
31
When I was in Medical School in Buenos Aires, Argentina, 20 years ago in our ethics courses in a country where abortions were not allowed we studied Roe v. Wade and it was a song of freedom, and I always thought it showed that the US was ahead in reference to women’s rights. Now sadly I feel the US has spiraled 50 years back in time... sadly women’s rights is not the only area that was battered: environmental protection, health care.... Three years into Trump’s presidency we have lost so many major achievements it makes me think what will happen if he gets re-elected. I hope 2020 is the end of this dark period.
171
@Maria
Your comment reflects the fact that the reactionaries (to give them their right description) have so much money that they can hire thousands of people, and buy thousands of politicians via their organizations, to plan and work decades ahead to return us to the Dark Ages (whether that means the 19th century or the 17th century or feudalism). That is one reason to get rid of billionaires, but since they control politics that is improbable. To those who claim "the left" (usually meaning centrist liberals) do the same, I reply that they are outspent and therefore out-organized by orders of magnitude.
2
Astounding. Not one mention in this article of the outstanding, long-standing work of the Center for Reproductive Rights, who will be arguing the next abortion case in the U. S. Supreme Court. Yes, the anti-choice forces have been methodical and organized in the states for many years. Yes, there is more to be done to support providers. No doubt. But, it was the Center who strategized and won the last abortion case before the Court in 2016 (Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstadt). That case addresses the exact issue of admitting privileges as the upcoming Louisiana case to be argued in March. The Center’s dedicated, successful legal work over the last many years has provided a clear framework of law that the Supreme Court, if it follows its own decisions, must follow. The question is: will it? Chief Justice John Roberts seems to care about the Court as an institution and its adherence to the basic principle of respecting past decisions. It’s because of the recent Center’s work gives pro choice supporters hope. It’s because of the Center’s careful planning and successful legal strategy that the next case won’t just be about the legitimacy of a woman’s right to choose her future, It will will be about the legitimacy and future of the Court.
44
@MP Thank you for that information regarding the Center for Reproductive Rights. I have donated to that organization in the past and will do so again this year.
1
Jeez, I had almost forgotten about the abortion issue in 2020. And I support Trump. All the more reason to vote for him. To think there are clinics like the one in Alabama that solely specialize in abortions. And I agree with one of the comments in the article, “If all we do as an organization is pay for abortions for low-income people, we are eugenicists.”
3
The left lost the battle on abortion by electing Bush in 2000 and Trump in 2016, and thereby handing 4 Supreme Court seats to the Republicans. It’s as simple as that. And make no mistake about it: Roe v. Wade is toast. And the left has nobody to blame but themselves. And what truly amazes me is that they have not learned a single thing.
2
@Mike Please note that it was the right that elected Bush and Trump, in both cases with the help of the Electoral College. When the system is rigged to promote government by the minority, as the EC does, along with the limit of two senators per state, regardless of the state's population, it's beyond ridiculous to blame the group that the system is rigged against.
3
This article promises to tell us about a "fragmented left" and then does a hit job on Planned Parenthood. What the fragmenting is, left unsaid: It is people demanding perfection on race and ethnicity issues, and a huge amount of the usual millennial ageism that does not believe in supporting any organization that was founded in the dark evil boomer days or before, and that doesn't have exactly one person of each race, all suitably millennial in its leadership.
The result isn't a fragmenting of the left, but a splintering of funding and the consequent fall of the only organizations that have experience fighting this fight.
The woman of color reading over my shoulder when I read this article reacted by saying that she refused to read anything that was so much navel-gazing storytelling and so few statistical and sociological facts. Me, I got to the part where internet tropes extant since 2005 -- Eugenics, really? Ron Paul supporters much? -- were being dragged in, and decided that I would double down on my support for Planned Parenthood and NARAL.
When all you do is rub salt in the wounds inflicted on them by the Christian Right under Trump, don't talk to me about it again. I've supported legal abortions -- and the ERA, and Planned Parenthood -- since I was a teenager and abortion was still illegal. I really really think I know more about the history than your millennial staff, I lived through it. The fight isn't over because it was never won. Eyes on the Prize!
13
@ondelette - Well said. I, too, was a young woman before legal birth control and before Roe. I'm beginning to think we might have to go back to those days before some of the younger people will wake up to what they're about to lose if they don't get busy and join the fight.
9
Several generations of women -- myself included -- have grown up having access to abortion. Are we taking it for granted? Do we really want to go back to the bad old days of coathanger abortions? Can we even imagine what that must have been like? The Times reported that Ohio is trying to pass a bill that makes it a crime not to replant an ectopic pregnancy into the mother's uterus - a medical procedure that does not exist! Both the doctor and the mother can be punished with life in prison or death for what Ohio is trying to call "abortion murder." Every gynecologist/obstetrician in the state could wind up in prison for not performing medically impossible surgery. Ohio and other states are plagued by legislators sponsoring bills written by anti-abortionists who don't have a clue about medicine or even how female anatomy works. We had better wake up and start voting and protesting to protect our rights. Ohio isn't the only state passing draconian anti-abortion laws.
24
The news on abortion has moved passed my anger and just breaks my heart for the low income women who can't access abortion in other states or outside of their ability.
14
What exactly is the left divided about? We favor the right to a safe and legal abortion as always. This is not “complex.” It’s true we have a dire problem with the right packing the courts with conservative judges. But the claim that this has happened because the left is “divided” is not supported. The right has passed draconian laws that do not reflect the will of the people. Let’s see the polling on criminalization of aborting an ectopic presidency. Hopefully the left will not ignore the judicial system as it has in the past.
55
Planned Parenthood lost my donation when they took up aggressive pro-trans campaigning. And shut out the voices of women who are less than thrilled to have their biology equated with the biology of men who like to play dress up and show disgust towards actual female bodies while demanding to be treated like women. I like to see my money get used the way it’s intended. I think I’ll look into making a donation directly to the the clinic in Alabama. Thanks for the info.
21
Here is how it all happened: A majority of White women voted for Trump. My wife and I aren't ever going to want or need an abortion, but up to 2016 I supported abortion rights, for others. Folks who might need or want an abortion had better get their political acts together and put an end to the Trump charade. Because I don't support people who won't stand up for themselves. I was all for women's rights and gender equality, right up to 2016. Now I see that most White women don't want equality. They want White privilege and a man to pay for their lives. So fine, I'll enjoy and take full advantage of my unfair benefits as a White man, and let them worry about themselves. Or, they can get up off the sofa and take a stand. Then, and only then, I'll be back with them.
2
@Joe, Trump's policies don't just affect white women. A majority of women of all races voted for Clinton, as did the vast majority of single women. We live here too, and we're the ones who are affected most.
1
The term "pro-life" has to be blown out of the water by Democrats. Illegal abortions can kill women; so can medically dangerous pregnancies. People embracing the pro-life mantra are more apt to embrace unregulated gun rights as well, and there's a strong correlation between anti-abortion and anti-environment, which is anything but pro-life. A human fetus is not the only life form on the planet.
"Safe, legal, and rare" is a powerful catch phrase that must be revived, emphasis on the word "rare." I think that anti-choice groups are total hypocrites when they oppose contraception of all kinds, and especially when they advocate abstinence- only sex education, something Trump supports. Trump? Of all people!
22
@Beverly Exactly! And don’t forget that the same people who call themselves “pro life” usually oppose adequate funding for schools and children’s healthcare.
1
The right has focused on two things in recent years: shoring up conservative state legislatures and building an impressive pipeline of conservative judges.
These efforts have been quite successful, and the left has been asleep. Black women in the south and midwest have paid the steepest price.
If you care about abortion rights and access, please support organizations with legislative and legal strategies, like state-based NARAL affiliates or the ACLU.
Do not rely on political parties or health care providers to lead on abortion rights and access. Look where that’s gotten us.
5
The Democrat strategy of normalizing and even celebrating very late term abortions is immoral and abhorrent to many, many Americans. The party will reap the rewards of being such a ghoulish party. The more strident they become, the fewer adherents. Why aren’t they promoting adoption? Oh the humanity!
8
Nobody has a late term unless it is a medical issue. Nobody.
23
@Greenville SC Reader
There is no such strategy of “very late term abortions.” What’s your plan for unwanted children? Why’s your plan for children living in poverty? I never about care for the mother or already birthed child.
It seems that if the choice is between "empowering the moderates" (who are NOT monolithically white by any means) and winning, versus empowering the Trumps and losing, it seems these "unapologetically lefty" activists are on the side of the Trumps. ... When I was coming up, Safe Legal and Rare was the liberal view. Somewhere along the way it became moderately conservative -- as well as unacceptable (in both the silly parties). ... Absolute "abortion on demand" has never been a majority view, and has never been a winning position in the states you need to win the presidency and the senate. Identity politics, a la Hillary Clinton's campaign, is even worse, electorally speaking. It seems that if the choice is between "empowering the moderates" (who are NOT monolithically white by any means) and winning, versus empowering the Trumps and losing, it seems these "unapologetically lefty" activists are on the side of the Trumps.
4
Everyone should take a solemn vow to stop talking and agitating about abortions.
2
I love the warning on Ms. Gray's computer.
We Won't Go Back.
5
Why hasn’t the the abortion pill made most of this heated debate moot?
You can’t stop someone from receiving a pill in mail...Spread the word
6
@Heard You Paint Houses
Plan B (morning after) is not the same as the abortion pill.
Plan B is a hormone that can be bought over the counter but only stops implantation within 3 days of intercourse. It is not 100% effective.
The so-called abortion pill requires a doctor's prescription and is 2 pills that are medically more complicated.
1
The left is not the loser here. The American people, men and women who want to control their reproductive choices, have lost.
30
What causes some people to rage with such fury against something they don't like and therefore demand it should be made illegal for everyone. What leads you to believe you have the final say in anyone's life? Stick to yours and leave me alone.
The list goes on and on and grows each year:
* Gay marriage
* Using marijuana
* Vaping
* Transgender rights
* GMOs
* Roundup to kill weeds in your lawn
* Eating red meat
* Charter schools
* Non charter schools
* Drinking whiskey (prohibition)
* Wearing fur
* Plastic straws
* Plastic shopping bags
* Shopping on Amazon
The answer to solving this manufactured rage is really quite simple: If you don't like (fill in the blank), don't do it! And then shut up about it.
It's really none of your business what some stranger does as long as it doesn't impact you negatively. And even if it does a little, that's too bad. Deal with it.
14
The Times writes: "Less attention has been paid to the left’s role in its own loss of power."
You can't be serious! It is liberal Democrats' fault that Republicans are destroying the constitutional right to abortion?
How typical of the corporate press and The New York Times to whitewash the GOP's extremism and contempt for the rule of law, and turn that illegality on its head by blaming Democrats.
No, NYT, it's not "really, really complicated." This is yet another attack on law and women by the GOP.
Simple enough for you?
77
Recently pro-abortion activist Democrat Rep. Wendy Ullman stated that miscarriages are "just mess in a napkin"
Statements such this is becoming the norm for the radical, more outspoken pro-abortionists.
10
@james
That's actually a realistic description of the physical reality of an early miscarriage. (In my case, I needed
a beach towel, as I miscarried a bit farther into a pregnancy, while on a long drive through a remote area with no facilities).
You'll never experience anything of that sort, but it is what it is. Pretending otherwise is disingenuous.
3
Abortion isn’t even in the top 10 issues Democrats care about because it was basically settled 50 years ago. It’s the economy stupid.
2
Maybe it's for the best if not so many babies are killed in the womb. We've learned from ultra-sounds that we're talking about real babies and not a "mass of cell" as leftists like to say.
10
The GOP will rue the day abortion goes back to the states. All local yokels will have demonstrations on their front lawns.
1
The left lost because America has a significant minority of uneducated, barbaric constituents that champion abusing women because they don't know any better.
7
Can any reader here explain "The Big Bang" theory at the beginning of time? Can any reader explain the metaphorically similar event that occurs in the womb when a cell explodes into human life? Now we know how to create our own Big Bang, (nuclear) and we know how to kill the unborn.
Forget your politics for a moment and your Bidens and Trumps, and think of the mystery that no one understands. Those of you with answers to the above are welcome to promote abortion. Otherwise let them live like you can live.
3
This anti-abortion movement is truly an effort to restrict liberty to what is moral in the opinion of the advocates. The issue is not really about opposing abortion but opposing the notion that anyone should be able to consider it as an option. The effort is to impose an ideal system of conduct upon all. It reflects a deeper effort to limit all liberties to those which conform with a moral order of religious beliefs to make the civil society reflect those beliefs. It’s an attempt to repeat the regime of Plymouth Colony, of the early 17th century.
The right is not alone in this effort to restrict liberty according to moral standards, the left is doing the same with other issues. Gun control that is intended to severely limit gun ownership and guns that can be owned without a consensus, of providing free higher education without a consensus, the efforts to impose one health care system without any consensus, to compel resolution of inequities by seizing property without consensus, and of addressing global warming by decree without any real plan, all intended to do good but at the expense of our liberties and of our democratic systems. People certain that they are doing what is best for all but not trusting in their ability to convince all to agree and to go along with them. Imposing what they are certain are the only good policies upon all.
2
“Miscalculations and divisions”.
If Trump wins re-election it will be because of this and he will set back the movement for a generation.
I look at the array of Democrat candidates and I am filled with fear. Biden is the only credible candidate, maybe Bloomberg. This is not the time for Medicare for all - the country is not ready for it, Sanders is past it and Mayor Pete is too young and unprepared. The others are non-starters.
24
@Full Name
I’m curious- Why do you consider Warren a non-starter?
She’s younger than, healthier than, and a bit to the right of self-declared-Socialist Bernie (whom you apparently would support but for his age) and she’s vastly more seasoned and to the left of Butigieg (whom you apparently would support but for his lack of experience).
It couldn’t possibly be because of her gender, could it?
33
@Full Name (required) Mayor Pete is hardly coming off as unprepared. I can't argue with you on "too young" because that's different for everyone.
3
Why isn’t this the time for Medicare for All? Why shouldn’t Americans have what citizens of every other first world nation have had for decades ? My expensive for profit health insurance almost killed me.
7
The framing of this piece is interesting: The Left-The Right; Opponents-Proponents...that's all surface stuff- really. Access to Reproductive services including abortion has and will always be a matter of economic status and station in life.
Of course, Conservatives have turned this very personal decision into a political gold-mine; political careers (and fundraising) are built around the *personal* of other's bodies:
Abortion will always be available to the well-heeled and their daughters (as it always has).
141
@Candlewick: They abuse law to force involuntary participation in religion.
16
@Candlewick Congress could address that inequity by prohibiting interstate and international travel to obtain an abortion. Make doing so an offense with a mandatory sentence of life without parole. Do the same for those funding such travel and those providing the abortion.
1
@Matt , since women do not get pregnant by themselves, men need to be held accountable too. Contribute to an unplanned pregnancy? Immediate jail time.
12
There is only one question.
Is the female sovereign or is she chattel?
If you as a female think you have the right to an opinion about another woman's medical decisions, you are still part of the problem.
There is only one question. Chattel or sovereign? Slave or citizen?
Anything else is obfustication designed to use our own mother instincts against us, individually and as a group.
362
@Tina: The US structure of liberty to enslave was not revised after the Civil War.
3
@Tina I see it differently. A woman is sovereign of her own body, I agree. But once pregnant, she divides her body with someone else, and I do not believe she has sovereign decision over the other individual's body. I don't believe this is fair, but that's just biology, where unfair things abound. And, except in some specific cases, I do not see how abortion can be considered a medical decision - same thing I would say about an elective plastic surgery for example. So I don't think, as you say, that it just boils down to that one question, because I see that the body of the child (or fetus if you prefer) has equal sovereignty as the body of the adult.. And there lies my own conflict and belief that abortion is morally wrong... I guess I am "part of the problem" as you say, but I also get to vote just as you do...
25
@Erica
Here is a hypothetical: a burning building houses 10,000 frozen embryos on one side and 5 year old child is on the other side. You can only save one side - which side do you choose to save? I'm sorry, an embryo is not the same as a living, breathing sovereign human.
Another hypothetical: 12 year old victim of rape/incest that is impregnated. A full term pregnancy is associated with many more health risks than pregnancy termination for all women, but the risks for a 12 year old are even greater. Do you agree that the 12 year old must endure these risks? Do you say, "sorry, 12 year old girl, biology is unfair?"
135
This is the closest the Times has come to admitting in some time to suggesting that "the Left" now constitutes 70% of the country. An oppressed majority.
111
@BarryNash: We vote where it doesn't matter.
7
Yes, and the fact that the Overton window has shifted a full stop to the right, we now have both a normalization of the Republicans allowing white nationalist rhetoric and the Democrats undercutting social welfare issues such as nationalized health care as “too liberal”.
A return to an adapted Fairness doctrine is likely the only possible correction.
15
As the condition of pronounced income inequality, the lack of equal access to reproductive health care choices appears to have been ignored - the myopia of the haves to the detriment of the have nots.
48
Truer words have never been spoken, @Barbara. Abortion access has become, as most things in this country, a matter of what your income status is. Those who have money get access to healthcare, housing, good education and security. Rich and powerful people will never lose their access to reproductive services, including abortion.
That is true no matter what people say in public.
16
@Jane K , that was true even before Roe vs Wade. The truly rich could fly (or take a boat) to Europe, where abortion was already legal in some countries.
6
@Barbara, Poverty is a more complex and broader problem. It is inadequate to address poverty in tandem with abortion only. A large percentage (about 50% in some states) of the births are to single mothers without a college education. Let that sink in.
More consequences of not having a 50 state strategy
42
@Moses Cat: That is the frontier of equal protection of the law in the US.
1
I'm not surprised there are not any comments on this thoughtful piece. I was president of a local Planned Parenthood chapter opening three family planning clinics (no abortion services) in central Wisconsin in the early 80's. Gradually, Planned Parenthood centralized its operations in our state and lost its local chapters. I was president of our state family planning association for many years over three decades and the schism between political advocacy and local health services at Planned Parenthood never really was conflict free. As a local non Planned Parenthood affiliate and as state association president,as well as a national RWJ award recipient, my experience was that Planned Parenthood is, as the writers described, "the pink elephant in the room." The organization does wonderful advocacy work and provides vital women's health care services, but as a team player, they are challenged and intensely brand focused - sometimes to the point of jeopardizing the services and partners on their team.
49
@Lon Newman Thank you for sharing this. How did you notice Planned Parenthood jeopardizing the services and the partners, as you put it? I'm curious too what it was like for you to discuss this with your Planned Parenthood peers.
4
@Elizabeth Dias Too much over too long for this format, Elizabeth. I just thought the article was well researched and the main point is that listening to folks at the local level and being willing to truly collaborate is probably the best way forward. At least in WI, our family planning program (which was the first ACA Medicaid State Amendment in the nation) has been reduced to a shadow of itself by two anti-family planning state administrations and the gutting of leadership at the federal level. It's a long road back home to universal access.
1
I've long believed that the all-or-nothing approach to reproductive choice-abortion rights is inadequate and unappealing to many people. I am a left wing progressive, lifelong passionate feminist AND I believe that 6 months is too late for abortion (except to save the life of the mother or in horrible medical situations of the fetus) because our technology now allows 6 months old babies to survive. We need to adjust to these new medical realities in our advocacy for women's empowerment and reproductive rights. Why aren't feminists and abortion rights activists looking at reasonable parameters and regulations (just like many of us we would like to see on gun laws). For example, if activists promoted 5 months as the latest point of abortion rights, more support would be generated. All or nothing advocacy is part of the problem and is not helping us maintain legal reproductive rights.
108
@christine Because if you say 5 months, the anti-abortion crowd will say 4 months. Once you agree to 4 months, they will go 3 months. Notice the recent legislative attempts to ban abortion if there is a fetal heartbeat. It's about subjugation of women either based on religious fundamentalism or misogyny, neither of which should be codified into law.
308
@christine I appreciate your position yet RvW already states the guidelines for abortion dividing it by trimesters. First trimester government could not prohibit abortions, second trimester reasonable health requirements could be required and finally third trimester was only to be limited to saving the life or health of the mother. I think we forget this and the pro-life side does not make it clear either.
176
@christine It's no one's business but the the sovereign female and the doctor's whose opinion she has paid for.
She is either sovereign or chattel.
If she is chattel, every other female is.
Stop thinking this is about anything other than raw power.
199