Big Tent politics-- abortion and Democrats

[TexasTiger 13,005]

The much maligned Pelosi is pretty rational on this issue. Tom Perez is not.

"

The Democratic Party should not impose support for abortion rights as a litmus test on its candidates, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Tuesday, because it needs a broad and inclusive agenda to win back the socially conservative voters who helped elect President Trump.

“This is the Democratic Party. This is not a rubber-stamp party,” Pelosi said in an interview with Washington Post reporters. 

“I grew up Nancy D’Alesandro, in Baltimore, Maryland; in Little Italy; in a very devout Catholic family; fiercely patriotic; proud of our town and heritage, and staunchly Democratic,” she added, referring to the fact that she is the daughter and sister of former mayors of that city. “Most of those people — my family, extended family — are not pro-choice. You think I’m kicking them out of the Democratic Party?”"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pelosi-democratic-candidates-should-not-be-forced-to-toe-party-line-on-abortion/2017/05/02/9cbc9bc6-2f68-11e7-9534-00e4656c22aa_story.html?utm_term=.b4bea9bfdb27

[PUB78 1,362]

28 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

The much maligned Pelosi is pretty rational on this issue. Tom Perez is not.

"

The Democratic Party should not impose support for abortion rights as a litmus test on its candidates, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Tuesday, because it needs a broad and inclusive agenda to win back the socially conservative voters who helped elect President Trump.

“This is the Democratic Party. This is not a rubber-stamp party,” Pelosi said in an interview with Washington Post reporters. 

“I grew up Nancy D’Alesandro, in Baltimore, Maryland; in Little Italy; in a very devout Catholic family; fiercely patriotic; proud of our town and heritage, and staunchly Democratic,” she added, referring to the fact that she is the daughter and sister of former mayors of that city. “Most of those people — my family, extended family — are not pro-choice. You think I’m kicking them out of the Democratic Party?”"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pelosi-democratic-candidates-should-not-be-forced-to-toe-party-line-on-abortion/2017/05/02/9cbc9bc6-2f68-11e7-9534-00e4656c22aa_story.html?utm_term=.b4bea9bfdb27

Probably the only rational words to come out of her mouth.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

1 hour ago, TexasTiger said:

The much maligned Pelosi is pretty rational on this issue. Tom Perez is not.

"

The Democratic Party should not impose support for abortion rights as a litmus test on its candidates, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Tuesday, because it needs a broad and inclusive agenda to win back the socially conservative voters who helped elect President Trump.

“This is the Democratic Party. This is not a rubber-stamp party,” Pelosi said in an interview with Washington Post reporters. 

“I grew up Nancy D’Alesandro, in Baltimore, Maryland; in Little Italy; in a very devout Catholic family; fiercely patriotic; proud of our town and heritage, and staunchly Democratic,” she added, referring to the fact that she is the daughter and sister of former mayors of that city. “Most of those people — my family, extended family — are not pro-choice. You think I’m kicking them out of the Democratic Party?”"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pelosi-democratic-candidates-should-not-be-forced-to-toe-party-line-on-abortion/2017/05/02/9cbc9bc6-2f68-11e7-9534-00e4656c22aa_story.html?utm_term=.b4bea9bfdb27

I'm amazed that she of all people is the one to speak common sense to the situation.  I've long said that the accusation about conservatives being single issue voters (abortion) was unfair - the other side of the abortion issue is just as dogmatic and "single issue" with their voting.  And given how Hillary thumbed her nose at social conservatives in the last election to her own detriment, you'd think the Dems would see an opportunity to drive a wedge between the Trump-apologist wing and the religious conservatives in the GOP.  Perez didn't see that.  Pelosi apparently does.  Good on her.

[homersapien 11,431]

A woman's right to terminate her own pregnancy is pretty basic.  It goes right to the basis of individual sovereignty and freedom.  That is consistent with the secular values of Republicans as well as Democrats.

Having said that, if Republicans want to eliminate that nationally guaranteed right by repealing Roe v. Wade, then have at it.  I have no problem with allowing the states to address it.  I am confident that at least some states - maybe even most - will preserve that right.

As for Democrats being "pro life", I don't have a problem with that either.  Just don't expect the Democratic party to turn their back on women by denying them the right to choose.

[AuburnNTexas 7,171]

It is time both parties recognize that people are not necessarily Liberal or Conservative on every issue. A person can fit the classification of Liberal on one issue and Conservative on another issue.  It is one of the reason more and more people are registering as Independent. One thing that amazes me is when the press comes down on the Republican party when they can't reach a consensus on something. I actually like that as it means they follow their beliefs and often represent the people who elected them.  The Republicans are not always in lock step with their leaders. On the other hand the Democrats are like automatons what ever their Party leader tells them to do they do it.

We need people in both parties who don't blindly follow what their leaders tell them. When we have that we can get compromise and actually address some of the big issues like healthcare.

Edited May 3, 2017 by AuburnNTexas

[aubearcat 2,138]

I would like to clarify that abortion is not a "right" as enumerated by any legal document of the United States. It is a legal precedence and court opinion that was based on the first amendment. It seems though, that if that precedence is used to form a "right". the equal protection clause would form a right for the young American that is being assassinated in the mother's womb. It seems to be legally hypocritical to charge a person with murder if they cause the death of a baby if the mother "wants" the baby but it's acceptable to murder it if she doesn't. Lastly, as I've participated in the political surveys that many of you have posted, they all in general label me as a moderate. This is one issue that I'm very ideological. 

[TitanTiger 20,510]

1 hour ago, AuburnNTexas said:

It is time both parties recognize that people are not necessarily Liberal or Conservative on every issue. A person can fit the classification of Liberal on one issue and Conservative on another issue.

You'll actually find that a lot of Catholics fall into this 'no-man's land' politically.  They are socially conservative so they are against killing the unborn as a method of birth control, they don't agree with the redefining of marriage to "whatever culture decides it is today."  But at the same time they are in favor of things like universal healthcare (even a single payer system), a strong social safety net, paid parental leave after the birth of a child, stricter regulation of Wall Street, and other so-called "Democrat" issues.  They are fiscally more liberal and think that government, while not the entirety of the solution to some problems, is a reasonable and effective means of handling many issues.

It's the height of arrogance to reject these people because they don't accept an artificial and arbitrary difference in rights based on 4-5 inches of travel down a vagina.

[TexasTiger 13,005]

10 hours ago, AuburnNTexas said:

It is time both parties recognize that people are not necessarily Liberal or Conservative on every issue. A person can fit the classification of Liberal on one issue and Conservative on another issue.  It is one of the reason more and more people are registering as Independent. One thing that amazes me is when the press comes down on the Republican party when they can't reach a consensus on something. I actually like that as it means they follow their beliefs and often represent the people who elected them.  The Republicans are not always in lock step with their leaders. On the other hand the Democrats are like automatons what ever their Party leader tells them to do they do it.

We need people in both parties who don't blindly follow what their leaders tell them. When we have that we can get compromise and actually address some of the big issues like healthcare.

Republicans are free thinkers and Dems are Automatons? Don't know what planet you occupy, but there must not be many democrats there. This thread was started showing the leading Dem in Congress disagreeing with the DNC chair.

[AU64 10,122]

NP is Catholic and trying to straddle the line on the issue...Perez is gonna win that discussion since he is articulating the Dem position..and NP will not change any minds...and even she would not support an anti-abortion judicial candidate.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Perez may be the best thing the GOP has going based on seeing his rantings to date.

[autigeremt 6,667]

On May 3, 2017 at 10:46 AM, homersapien said:

A woman's right to terminate her own pregnancy is pretty basic.  It goes right to the basis of individual sovereignty and freedom.  That is consistent with the secular values of Republicans as well as Democrats.

Having said that, if Republicans want to eliminate that nationally guaranteed right by repealing Roe v. Wade, then have at it.  I have no problem with allowing the states to address it.  I am confident that at least some states - maybe even most - will preserve that right.

As for Democrats being "pro life", I don't have a problem with that either.  Just don't expect the Democratic party to turn their back on women by denying them the right to choose.

Oh please.....stop sounding like a Libertarian. Lol 

I find the abortion issue to be one of the more perplexing issues we have. So much irony. 

[quietfan 233]

I am of the opinion that too much political energy is wasted obsessing over morality topics like abortion or same-sex marriage.  Seeking agreement on those issues is a futile waste of time, so I say leave the status quo in place (i.e., I don't tell you what to believe regarding those topics, and you don't tell me) and turn our efforts to more important and more resolvable issues.

I'd rather us focus on economic justice for those already born, the human rights of those already born, an environmentally healthy planet that we and our descendants can live with, education, scientific progress, and sane international diplomacy that actually promotes peace.  (Although I suppose some might argue that those issues are equally resolvable and therefore equal wastes of time.  )

 

 

[TitanTiger 20,510]

Without digging into the specific arguments yay or nay, I think it's easy to call for settling on the status quo when the status quo is basically what you want already. Would you be as willing to accept the status quo and move on if abortion were illegal or severely limited from what it is now?

[quietfan 233]

2 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

Without digging into the specific arguments yay or nay, I think it's easy to call for settling on the status quo when the status quo is basically what you want already. Would you be as willing to accept the status quo and move on if abortion were illegal or severely limited from what it is now?

I would still think other issues are more important and more deserving of our political focus and energy.  And while I am 'pro-choice', but I don't expect the 'pro-life' folks to ever agree with me.  So rather than argue, I'd think we as a nation should move on to deal with those problems we can resolve.