Are people here pro-life?

[undeterred]

I am not Catholic, I am a pro-choice Quaker Christian. But I am working on the campaign of a progressive Catholic running for Congress. I just assumed he was pro-choice until one day he quietly told me that he was not. He was raised on a dairy farm, the 13th of 14 children, and raised 4 children of his own. He still lives in a rural area which is mostly pro-life. This will actually help him with a lot of voters.

It actually took me a few days to think about it, and now I am fine with it. So I disagree with him on one issue- its made me revisit my own thoughts on the subject. I hate abortion but I want it to be safe and legal.

But I can't believe how nasty some Democrats are to him. There are people who say that because he is not pro-choice he is a Republican. They will not give him money- then they complain that he is not fundraising enough. And people have criticized me for supporting him (like I'm not allowed the "choice" of supporting a candidate who is against abortion on a personal level).

I wonder if there are a lot of Catholics who feel like the Democratic party is really insensitive on this issue?

[rug]

1. I don't see the issue as pro-choice or pro-life.

The question for me is how far will the state go to support a religious view.

Accepting human life begins at conception and is a moral wrong does not equate to requiring the state to enforce it. Outlawing abortion simply means imprisoning women and doctors, which I do not support.

Contraception is also viewed by the Catholic Church as a grave moral wrong, but I don't see as much publicity for Priests Against Condoms as I do for Priests For Life.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

2. I absolutely agree with Rug.

For me the issue is less whether one personally feels that abortion is wrong and more about whether one wishes to have their personal views on the subject made the law of the land.

[undeterred]

3. I don't think my candidate went into it really thinking about it

as a political issue. And now that the cat is out of the bag, a lot of things are being projected onto him. He hasn't crafted a statement on it- I really think his thoughts on it are just those of a father. But now that its out there, its a litmus test, and it seems unfair.

[rug]

4. If he's running for Congress there are statements he can make that are both progressive and pro-life

First, he can oppose any bill that would incarcerate women for having an abortion. That is the logical conclusion of outlawing abortions.

Second, he can propose a bill guaranteeing pre-natal and post-natal care regardless of ability to pay. Let a right-winger argue higher taxes versus providing direct medical care to a mother and fetus. Their money is rarely where their mouths are.

Third, he can frame many progressive issues, such as a right to medical care, a right to housing, opposition to war, opposition to capital punishment, etc. as an extension of the right to life.

The term pro-life has to be snatched from the realm of embryology and applied to the society at large.

[undeterred]

5. Thank you

He is definitely consistently pro life. The peace groups love him for his strong anti-war stance.
I actually found a prolife Dem in MN8 who sponsored some good bills. My candidate believes health care is a right, and he is against the death penalty. I never argued with him about the framing of it- I just am looking for positive things he can say about supporting women with unwanted pregnancies- and there are bills out there like that.

[theredpen]

6. Adding a tiny bit to what rug said

Even the Catholic Church, which takes a hard line on abortion officially, recognizes that some abortions are medically necessary. For this reason alone, abortion must remain a safe an legal medical procedure. Theoretically, an anti-abortion law that allows exceptions to save the life of the mother would address both sides, but "medical necessity" is a slippery slope and I'd rather leave it in the hands of doctors rather than lawyers and legislators.

Do I believe that many abortions are utterly immoral, even if they are ethical? Yes. Does that mean that a pro-choice legal environment allows people to commit morally inexcusable acts? Yes. But that doesn't make this any different from many other areas in medical ethics.

[meow2u3]

7. The only abortions morally permissible..

...are those which are a side effect of a life-saving medical or surgical procedure, e.g., a hysterectomy of a pregnant woman with life-threatening cancer.

[DemBones DemBones]

13. Exactly. The intent must be to save the mother's life, not to kill the baby.

It is obvious that if a woman requires a hysterectomy or radiation treatment before the baby is old enough to be delivered and live that the treatment will kill, or is likely to kill, the baby but that's not the purpose of the treatment, it's a secondary effect.

The ideal is to save both.

[pingzing58]

8. I'm Catholic and Pro Choice. Separation of Church and State requires such a position.

I'm Roman Catholic and do not believe in abortion as an option to resolve a woman or girls situation concerning economic support, or social concerns. But a woman has right to choose. My Archbishop Gomez of San Antonio complained that Hillary was welcomed to speak at St. Mary's University. I asked the question to those who support the Archbishop what has he done to educate the poor concerning health care for their children (the CHIP program) or No Child Left Behind that doesn't really provide for the education of children. He hasn't done anthing. Who is he and what does he do? The Archdiocese has not donated a cent to the programs and homes for unwante children. Instead they are mounting a multi-million dollar compaign for the preservation of the historical mission of San Antonio. Unbelievable.

[undeterred]

9. I ask the question here because I know

that for those of us who believe in God it is a difficult issue. I have never been able to think of or speak of a fetus as "tissue". It is life, and we have all passed through this stage. I guess I find it troubling that political discourse resolves this so easily.

I spoke to a Quaker doctor who has performed many abortions. He said he never dreamed his career would involve this. He became a country doctor to practice family medicine. The first abortion he performed was on a 10 year old girl who was the victim of incest. He said she would have died if she had remained pregnant and given birth and that she really did not fully understand what had happened to her. So he was in a moral dilemma by being her physician. And this was before Roe v Wade. So what he did took great moral courage, but it was also quite painful.

I do respect Hillary Clinton for saying that abortion should be "safe, legal, and rare" and think that maybe it is good to have some people really focusing on the educational side of things. Not promoting abstinence, but educated responsible sex. The opposite of what Bush is doing...

[nxylas]

10. I'm not opposed to promoting abstinence AS AN OPTION

Young people are often pressured into sex against their better judgement, and they need to be taught that it's OK to say no.

[shimmergal]

11. I'm "pro-choice;" not Catholic either,

but I too feel the public and political discourse about abortion is too simplistic. I was looked at askance in my local progressive discussion group when I started off a sentence by saying, "Every abortion is a tragedy, but..." BTW, these were mostly men who obviously didn't see any deeper dimension to the issue. I got the feeling that by saying what I did, to them I somehow signaled sympathy with those who would illegalize it, which is not the case.

I've also supported Sen. Harry Reid who is personally "pro-life," but has never--to my knowledge--campaigned as a "pro-life" candidate. Instead, he speaks about the need to provide for all children's needs, etc.

One other thing your candidate might do is to emphasize how responsible male behavior can lessen the need for abortions. A touchy subject, sure, but child support enforcement is still not working out for many women and children.

[pnwmom]

12. I am pro-freedom of conscience -- as is the Catholic Church.

I don't think Catholics should be making laws that infringe on that freedom.

[johnlal]

14. The issue is damaging our Church...

I hate to see the Church devolving into a "Cult of the Fetus". It appears that the Church is going to make this particular belief (Right to Life) central and necessary to the entire religion.

[shrike]

17. I see it happening at my parish

Our Peace and Social Justice Commission has become the Right-to-Life Commission. VERY poor use of its time, IMO.

[pingzing58]

15. Catholic Bishops fell in line with Right Wing Fundamentalists who believe

that the only way to solve the problem of "abortion on demand" is to pass a law and make it illegal. That won't happen. If the Republicans would have wanted they would have changed the law already. Who is challenging Roe v Wade? No one. That answer is not to make it illegal or to change the U.S. constitution but to reach the individual person and help them understand the value of all human beings from the moment of conception to natural death. It's a personal moral and ethical dilemma that can be change. Your thoughts?

[nxylas]

16. If only more Democrats talked like that

I think the Democratic Party really doesn't help by downplaying its record of achievement in reducing abortions. The number of abortions actually declined during the Clinton years and went up when Junior became president, mostly due to his obsession with abstince-only sex education programs. But you'd never know it to hear either party speak. The Republicans need to maintain the illusion that they are the pro-life party to appease their Southern evangelical base and the Democrats are afraid that if they give any indication that abortion is a bad thing, the boomer generation that fought for abortion rights will accuse them of selling out on "choice". So they are both equally complicit in a lie.