paraphrasing the famous poem by Pastor Martin Niemøller:

When folks talk about "single-issue politics", which issues are sancrosanct and which can be jettisoned?

I forget who it was, but it's been wisely said that "If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything."


-- Walking In Darkness --

I'm afraid this is going to scroll away fast, so I want to get a word in here before it does,and the word is--thanks. There are many good sentences in your post, including: I'm concerned that we have found ourselves in a place where being a pro-choice Democrat is viewed as inconvenient or distasteful. Even on Vasoline, your brain works just fine.

My Website

Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.

Pro-choicers are not single-issue voters.  We see that the many anti-choicers want to do away with contraception.  We see that many anti-choicers want gay marriage bans.  We see that many anti-choicers are the same people who want school prayer.  We see that many anti-choicers think that "intelligent design" is a science.  We see that many anti-choicers want to go back to the days of Ozzie and Harriet, days that were, in reality, fictional.  We see that many anti-choicers long for the days when everyone just knew their place, five steps behind white males.

Abortion is the frontline for many of these fights.  If the anti-choicers are dealt losing blows here, we can beat them anywhere.

Visit me at Tunnel Traveller

Do we really intend to sacrifice every woman's civil liberties at the altar of unfettered government oversight of every woman's uterus?

Seems so, doesn't it. And thank you for recognizing the nature and opinions of the majority of people, women and men, who participate here. Like you, I'm often stunned by what I read here. Since I first logged on here almost a year ago, I've found the best thing for me to do is keep my mouth shut and read. Read and learn. And when I do say something I try to be respectful of everyone's positions. Attacking those you don't agree with, with republican talking points, will get you a quick and overwhelming education in what really matters, and what's really at stake. We all want to see Bush impeached. We all need health insurance. We all want this war to end. But we cannot sacrifice women's rights as a way to get there. That's not negotiable...period.  

Green Grass and High Tides Forever

I have been so disturbed ever since reading that thread. All I could add to the discussion there was a line of snark because if I had expressed my reactions I would have violated the "Don't be a prick" rule. You have said everything I wanted to say... so nicely. Thank you.

The Oklahoma law will make physicians "lecture" women about abortions and fetal pain. That's almost straight out of "The Department of Homeland Decency: Decency Rules and Regulations Manual." In that hilarious satire, the physician must "do everything he can to make sure she has lots of kids and obeys her husband." Also, "Does he note in the medical records which women visited an abortion warehouse? Whether anyone went to jail?" Women are property and they must be made to have kids and to stay home with them. The Department of Homeland Decency will ensure that. Read more at www.homelanddecency.com

Thank you, Chris!

I get it, and just as soon as the right of every woman to do exactly what she chooses with her uterus, or any other part of her body, without any government oversight is completely secure and no longer under attack, I'll buy everybody a drink at my corner bar.

And then we can concentrate on many of the issues that lead women to choose abortion: lack of healthcare, lack of childcare, absent fathers, rape, incest, lack of  easy, affordable access to contraception, discriminatory adoption laws, abstinence only sex "education," etc., etc.

Again, thank you!

If you want things to get better, be prepared to deal with change.

but advocating for a position shared by a majority of the country, which also happens to be right, seems just about as convenient as you can get. Pragmatic, even.

----
It is good politics in the longer run to state and then stick with an important principle. In the Bob Casey situation, my argument has always been that many women are just not paying that close attention to what is happening.  However, when "Roe" goes down and more than half the electorate wake up to their second class citizenship status, I do not want their anger and blame seeking to be clouded by Dems that are also responsible for their second class status. I want them to say, oh those conservative repubs want to control MY body ha!  Well the hell with that; I am voting them all out according to the super clear and defined progressive agenda.

This cannot happen with Harry reid and Bob Casey also being responsible for the demise of Roe and women's control over their bodies!

Good story and my complements!

holy shit am I glad I missed those threads. I don't think I would have been all that civil. No in fact I think I would have unleashed a whole bunch of vitriol in them.

Funny thing is, I skipped 'em because I knew the answer already... here IS what happens when you are willing to deny your fellow humans their human rights.

Chris, thanks for this piece, it means a lot.
As for all my peeps who kept thier cool and kept fighting the good fight against ignorant odds... good on ya & thanks.

Is there any chance of putting this post back up at the top? I think there are many people who would like to read it and comment, and who may not see it otherwise.

My Website

when the great debate war was going on at KOS before the PA Dem primary?

I was fighting against Casey and not particularly for anyone else because of what is being said here and was was said in the "Greensooner's" diary.  I had to wage war against all these DINO like posters who seemed to be trolls or at least were hell bent on painting women's rights issues as secondary to winning against Sanotrum at all cost.  They could not see the passive agressive, longer term benefit of supporting women's freedoms, not to mention it is just the correct thing to do.  Again, where were all these pro-women, anti-Casey folks back then????  Is it too late now, and what can/should we do?

Thank you so much.  If the Democratic Part cannot -- or will not -- support a woman's control over the most intimate and personal decisions she ever has to make -- then how can they claim to stand for anything with regards to individual rights or civil liberties at all?

This should be bedrock under the platform planks, non-negotiable. There are far more effective ways to reduce abortion than by banning it, world-wide statistics bear that out. Why is that so difficult for some people to grasp?

I will never support or vote for an anti-choice candidate, EVER. I don't care what the alternatives are.

Keith Olbermann speaks for me.

I chose not to comment in those threads rather than violate Booman's no being a prick rule and having my blood pressure spike.

Kelly McCullough - author of WebMage, Cybermancy, CodeSpell, and MythOS - ACE (Penguin)

Towards the end of our discussion, I used the link to pop over to Orange and see what the response there was.  It was just as I expected...A democratic majority is more important than women's rights.  Even so-called pro-choice women were being duped into conceeding that control over their bodies was worth giving up if it meant that we could impeach Bush.  As if that will ever happen, majority or not.  

Thank you Chris.  You said what I wanted to say so eloquently and succintly, fuzzy brain or not.

Somehow, we have simply got to convince the left that giving up our rights to love, happiness, and long life is not worth what miniscule benefits we might obtain with a democratic majority.