Since kos'
post on NARAL's outright rejection of Langevin, and a very thought-provoking exchange with
stickmd, I've been thinking about abortion. I'm a big believer that our current "pro-choice" vs. "pro-life" debate is a perennial loser and a pair cement shoes for progressives, because it puts all us in the position of defending abortion, which is not really what we (or me at least) are in favor of.
What Dems and reproductive rights activists are advocating for is very straightforward: the right of women to determine their own destiny in areas from work, to choice of partner, to sports to sexuality. Decades ago, advocating for women's equality of choice in these areas was a radical concept called feminism. Reproductive rights are an important part of feminism, but to my outsider's view (I'm a guy, and not a reproductive rights activist) they have usurped center stage from the rightful centers of attention: women, privacy, and being the mistress/master of one's own destiny (that quaint notion called liberty).
I hit on a metaphor in that conversation with stickmd I think is useful - here's an extension:
Various friends of mine have expressed to me that their parents (largely their fathers) kept them on the straight and narrow with liberal use of the belt. Other friends of mine find the idea of raising a child using force - even spanking - abhorrent, and strongly oppose its use as a parenting technique. Most in the anti-belt group concede that plenty of kids of have been succesfully raised in the belting tradition they detest, and few that I know of suggest outlawing the practice of parents disciplining kids with a belt - this without giving an inch on broader abuse and neglect of children. The belt is something you put up with, because outlawing it is a step too far. I have heard of others who would rather do whatever it takes to outlaw any striking of children, including banning the belt.
I would suggest that abortion is to many people, particular traditionally-minded people, like the belt is to anti-smiting parents - an unpleasant practice that must be tolerated in the name of individual liberty - be that of women or of parents. The Doctor's money quote on Meet the Press last weekend:
And there are significant numbers of pro-life Democrats in the South. And one lady said to me, you know, "I'm pro-life. I don't like abortion. I would never have one. I would hope my daughter would never have one. But, you know, if the lady next door got herself in a fix, I'm not sure I should be the one to tell her what to do." Now, we call that woman pro-choice, but she thinks of herself as pro-life. The minute we start with the "pro-choice, pro- choice, pro-choice," she says, "Well, that's not me."
I think this comes from the merging of two efforts on the part of the pro-choice activist groups:
- Rock-solid protection for reproductive rights on part of women.
- Reduction of the stigma associated with abortion.
Many here, again including
kos, agree that the first effort fits very well into the a "privacy" frame, or another one that puts a woman's control of her own life at the forefront The second, whatever its merits, is a more difficult proposition, and brings us much closer to the defense of abortion itself. Advocating for the de-stigmatization of abortion effectively results in telling people what they should or shouldn't believe (i.e., "you shouldn't believe abortion is wrong"), and gives cover to the theocrats' claims that "the liberals are trying to strip people of religion".
I understand the desire to eliminate the stigma from abortion, and certainly at the inception of groups like NARAL, that kind of stigma extended well beyond to abortion to... wearing pants! Nonetheless, at this point in time, it is a huge political loser, and simply fighting tooth and nail for it is counterproductive. I would even go as far as saying that calling them "reproductive rights" is a bad frame (who's for the "right to belt"?). We are the party of liberty and equality for women and the sooner we talk about that rather than abortion the better we stand against the party of "moral control".