Daily Kos

Safe, Legal, Rarely Used, & Universally Available

Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 12:03:14 PM PDT

Cross-posted from Hot Flash Report.

In a desperate attempt to couch their pro-choice stands on abortion, Democratic candidates all over the country have adopted the Clintonesque mantra that they want abortion to be:

"Safe, Legal and Rare"

This was vigorously discussed several weeks ago in a DailyKos Diary by Beket.

The problem is that this catchphrase worked for the charming wordsmith Bill Clinton in the 90's, but it marginalizes the issue for politicians 15 years later in 2007.

It's time to revamp this phrase to reflect the realities of 2007 to:

"Safe, Legal, Rarely Used and Universally Available"

"Universally Available" abortions were also extensively discussed in a DailyKos Diary by Readrock several weeks ago.

The same hack consultants who imploded the Gore and Kerry campaigns are telling Democratic candidates to back off the abortion issue by copping out to theoretically get elected. Dr. Dean, who as a physician should know better, has even succumbed to this position. Why should we listen to these guys?

So, let's really analyze this cop-out phrase.

Safe

Since abortion was legalized in 1973, it's been safer than childbirth, the obvious alternative. Currently, early abortions are 10-12 times safer than childbirth. Having no legal abortions available would condemn women to the more risky procedure of childbirth, thus harming women's health and killing more women.

If abortion becomes illegal, abortions will still be provided but illegally and unsafely. Illegal abortions are obviously NOT SAFE, and would also do more harm than the current system. So, the only option for SAFE, is to continue the availability of legal abortion as it is. One could even expand this and argue that SAFER would include the government paying for all abortions which would mean that women got abortions earlier and avoided the more risky later abortions.

So, safe is, er...safe.

Abortion opponents don't care about "safety". The Right Wing Noise Machine has a history of debunking science and medical studies. Ronald Reagan started this trend in the 80's by disbanding the Abortion Surveillance Branch of the CDC. You see, in the 70's and 80's this esteemed group of scientists and doctors investigated every abortion related death and complication, studied abortion trends and procedures, and actually improved the status of legalized abortion in this country by giving practitioners guidance on techniques, medicines, etc. Their unbiased and completely scientific reports demonstrated without question the positive public health benefits of legalized abortion. The Reagan administration didn't like this outcome because it didn't fit into their political agenda, so they disbanded this Branch of the CDC. Today, there is a need for an unbiased effort to study outcomes of several infection related abortion pill deaths, but that ability was compromised 25 years ago by a political witch hunt.

If politicians really looked at the science and the statistics, people concerned about the health of women and the safety of abortion vs. childbirth would opt for outlawing childbirth and promoting abortion.

But "safe" in this context also means regulation. And some regulations imposed by the states are not meant to improve the health of women, but are impediments to getting an abortion. They're called TRAP Laws, and they impose burdensome consent and waiting period requirements to name a few. These laws have been passed in almost every state and serve to make abortion less accessible, more expensive, and therefore very "rare" to the form of extinction in some states. Mississippi, North Dakota, and South Dakota boast only one abortion clinic each. And each state has regulated them almost to death.

Legal

Well then if you're committed to abortion remaining LEGAL, why have DLC Democrats embraced candidates such as Bob Casey in Pennsylvania, who ran successfully against anti-abortion wingnut Santorum for the Senate?  Casey doesn't want abortion to be LEGAL. He's Democrat Lite or DINO and would vote every time with the Republicans to marginalize abortion even further.

It's amazing how the Republicans have so battered the so-called "Pro-Choice" Republican Senators (Snow, etc.) into always voting anti-abortion.

Anti-abortion Democrats, on the other hand, always always vote anti-abortion.

Obviously, the Republicans are partisan Republicans first and keep their "pro-choice" campaign promises second. Anti-abortion Democrats, however, vote the way they tell their constituents they're going to vote and nevermind that "Democrat" thingy.

Being a Democrat has to mean something. And that something should include legalized abortion, just as it includes equal opportunity, access to healthcare, government accountability, etc.

The Republicans have moved the abortion meme so far to the Right that even moderate positions are considered "pro-abortion". When you really analyze it, the Far Left position would be forced abortion and the Far Right position would be no abortions at all. Therefore, the current position of "Choice" is the moderate centrist position. Politicians who say "I'm personally opposed to abortion, but I wouldn't impose that position on others" are actually being moderate. That's what we should strive for.

Rare

Rare. What is rare? The obvious illusion with this word is that it's better for all of us to work to make abortion less necessary. That means education? That means availability of contraceptives? That means abstinence? What exactly does that mean?

Late D&X abortions were safe and rare. But the hatemongers on the Right changed the discussion and called them "Partial Birth Abortions" and outlawed and criminalized these abortions which were provided to women with hopelessly flawed pregnancies in an attempt to safeguard their fertility. I prefer to call them "Mercy Abortions", and offer this as an example of the Republicans wanting abortion to be not "Safe, Legal, and Rare", but "Never".

Education on birth control and abortion is available everywhere. For 11 years, I've operated a website: AnnRose's Ultimate Birth Control Links. It's a resource about birth control choices aimed at teenagers, but used by all ages. And it's now one of thousands of online sites about birth control.  So what does this mean? It means that education is there. Teenagers can all go online and get information on sex, birth control, etc. They don't have to wait for their parents to help them stumble through it or for the school system to talk about the frog's reproductive system.

The disconnect comes in actually obtaining birth control. Most insurance plans pay for Viagra so men can get an erection and technically procreate at age 100. Birth control, on the other hand, is rarely paid for by insurance.  Currently, the cost of birth control pills in college healthcare centers has skyrocketed out of control, from about $7 per month to about $35/month.

In countries such as France where the national healthcare system pays for birth control and abortions, abortions are rarer. Later abortions are especially rarer because one of the main reasons many women wait is because they can't afford to pay for the abortion or birth control.

Interestingly and ironically enough, many young women get their first dose of sexual and birth control education at the time of their abortion. A bit late, eh? Abortion clinics have always promoted birth control to their patients and it is a core part of the abortion process. Clinic counselors don't say to patients "Would you like to be on birth control?". They say "What birth control would you like to be on?". Birth Control pill manufacturers even recognize that more women are started on the Pill in abortion clinics than in OB-GYN offices or Health Departments.

People aren't stupid. But, people are human. They make mistakes. Mistakes are a part of life. Even though women and men know what they should do to prevent pregnancy, they often take chances and don't do what they're supposed to do according to a perfect worldview.

Couples know they should contracept if they want to have sex and avoid pregnancy.
But, but...the mood was right and:

  1. I didn't take my pill because I couldn't afford the next pack
  1. He didn't use condoms because the feeling's not there
  1. I didn't want to stop and put in the diaphragm
  1. He didn't want me to use the IUD because he could feel the string
  1. I didn't have time to contracept because he raped me
  1. He said he'd pull out in time

Come on now tell me the truth.

Have you ever had unprotected sex when you didn't want a pregnancy to occur?  Yes you.  I mean you.

Come on now, think back. Just that one time. Just that one "risky" experience that could have led to an unplanned pregnancy and ended in unplanned childbirth or abortion. Just that desperate groping as a teenager that could have changed your life.

Just that one time when you (or your girlfriend/wife/one-night-stand) were late for your period. Remember the jolt in the stomach? The fear? The "what-ifs"?

Think back now. I'm waiting.

So, the bottom line is that all of you reading this (and people in general) are risk-takers. Risk-taking behavior has nothing to do with education.

People know they should exercise and eat right. But, sometimes they choose not to.
How about you?

People know they shouldn't smoke. But, sometimes they choose to smoke.
How about you?

People know they should use their seatbelts. But, sometimes they choose not to.
How about you?

People know they shouldn't drink and drive. But, sometimes they choose to smoke.
How about you?

People know they should use birth control if they're having sex and don't want a pregnancy to occur.
But, sometimes they choose not to.
How about you?

The benefits of not contracepting (or not exercising, or not smoking, etc.) outweigh the perceived risks. People are therefore human and make decisions which lead to risky behavior and unwanted outcomes.

So, how rare?

In comparison to the number of pregnancies in this country, abortion is at the same time "rare" and ingrained in the fabric of American life.

Rare in that only approximately 1.3 million abortions are performed in the US per year.  I'm surprised that number isn't higher.

Not so rare that over 40 Million Americans have opted for legal abortion in the past 34 years.
Over 40 million women have had legal abortions since 1973.
Over 40 million men have donated sperm to these legal abortions.
Over 40 million friends, family, clergy, etc. have supported these women.

That's over 100 million Americans that have benefited from the legalized abortion system. That's fully 1/3 of the population of the United States of America.

So I summarize to the Democratic Party and Democratic Politicians:

There are an estimated 20 million Evangelical Christians controlling the moral agenda of the Republican Party.

There are over 100 million Americans experienced with legalized abortion that you should not marginalize.

In any group of 100 people at a church gathering, potluck dinner, sports event, political rally, social function, etc., at least half have had direct experience with abortion. Don't talk down to those men and women by berating them and saying that what they did should be "rare". What they did was OK and it's not for you to judge. "Rare" implies that they are not in the mainstream. That they are out of the ordinary. Not true.

Here's what a politician (or anybody) should say when asked your position on abortion:

"There are over 100 million Americans who have benefited from legalized abortion and I'm not going to second guess them. I think abortion is personal, private and should not be bantered about on the political stage. I trust women and men to make decisions about their families without governmental intrusion. There are many other issues such as education, gas prices, the War in Iraq, healthcare, the environment, etc. that Americans tell me they're worried about. Abortion is not one of them, and again I will not second guess the American public. I will not consider abortion to be an issue that needs to take up the government's time until these other more important issues are solved for the American public."

Conclusion

The Republicans will always try to make abortion, gay marriage, immigration, etc. the scapegoats in the 2008 election.

If the Democrats win, it'll be because they don't marginalize abortion.

If the Democrats lose, it'll be because those pesky abortionists wouldn't go away and messed up their Grand Plan.

If the Republicans win, it'll be because Americans want abortion to be outlawed.

If the Republicans lose, it'll be because the majority of Republicans are sick and tired of this issue coming up and co-opting the real conservative business agenda.

Both parties wish this issue would just go away from the national stage. It's a no-win issue for both and I think it has played out.

34 Years.

34 Years of legalized abortion in this country.

100 Million Americans have already voted.

Give it a rest.

Get it off of the national stage and out of the political process.

Focus on the real issues Americans want government to solve.

Abortion is personal. It's private.  It's individual. It's none of your business.

If you're against abortion, don't have one. Period.

Otherwise:

"Abortion should be Safe, Legal, Rarely Used, and Universally Available"

Tags: abortion (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 53 comments

  •  I think you said it all (10+ / 0-)

    ...if only folks can wade through it!  Good post!

    The longer I live, the clearer I perceive how unmatchable a compliment one pays when he says of a man "he has the courage to utter his convictions." Mark Twain

    by Persiflage on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 12:11:05 PM PDT

  •  How to make it more pithy? (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    william f harrison

    "Abortion should be Safe, Legal, and Rare - just like heart bypass surgery"?

    Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

    by elfling on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 12:14:28 PM PDT

    •  The problem is... (5+ / 0-)

      there's no people outside hospitals yelling at patients and telling them they should NOT have heart bypass surgery.

      So...what's wrong with "Rarely Needed"?

      HotFlashReport - Opinionated liberal views of the wrongs of the right focusing on abortion and reproductive rights.

      by annrose on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 12:16:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I want someone to defend the morality of abortion (13+ / 0-)

        I want our presidential candidates to say that abortion is a moral choice which requires strength and courage.  That women and families make these choices for the children they already have or will have in the future.

        Access to professional abortion care helps build healthy families.  Forced maternity on behalf of the state hurts families.  We need Choice Joyce's stuff here that explains that if we think abortion is immoral then we really think women are immoral.  Well, I guess that is why Irishwitch has trouble with Christianity.  But the Bible aside, I want our presidential candidates to speak forcefully about women needing abortion care in order to create healthy American families.  Because that is the truth and the truth is long overdue.  Professional abortion care is declining at an alarming right in this country for a variety of reasons.  And something needs to be done.  "Safe, Legal and Rare" comes no where close to discussing what needs to be discussed regarding public policy and professional abortion care and the crisis (yes, crisis) we are now in when it comes to "reproductive health care".

        Women, each of whom are someone's DAUGHTER, are being hurt TODAY IN AMERICA because they have no access to professional abortion care.  We have a crisis for American women and our Democratic leaders are silent...or have thrown us under the damn bus!

        •  Amen. n/t (7+ / 0-)

          HotFlashReport - Opinionated liberal views of the wrongs of the right focusing on abortion and reproductive rights.

          by annrose on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 12:40:08 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Very well said, Readrock! (7+ / 0-)

          A private gyn office offering full gyn services including abortion care to 18 weeks.

          by william f harrison on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 01:06:05 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I'm 73 so I grew up with it being illegal (9+ / 0-)

          and I had girlfriends who worked for doctors that got them. And well done abortions and got themselves admitted to the hospital right afterwards.

          But poor women everywhere will seek any way they can find to get them. If they can't find anyone they can find a clothes hanger. And they will do that in desperation. There was a time in my life that I knew I'd rather be dead than pregnant.

          Anyone who feels that way has no business raising a baby. And shouldn't have to.

          But this is not a moral war. It is a war against women pure and simple. If women have legal and easy access to abortion then they are not so easily controlled. And any woman wanting out of a bad marriage who becomes pregnant is desperate. And never forget that men deliberately try to make you pregnant to keep you just where you are. Dependent. On them.

          And the worst offenders are the women who had to get married or were dumped are the most vicious when their daughters become pregnant. You are going to have this baby or else. I did and so are you. They do not want their daughters to escape and have a different life than they have had. So it is still hatred of the baby they had to have.

          FUKUOKA: Part of my purpose is to create a society where no one has to do anything.PARACELSUS:So then, you wormy and lousy Sophist...

          by abbeysbooks on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 02:22:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  First of all Irish WItch (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          annrose, julifolo

          doesn't have issues with Christianity. She has issues with a particular BRAND of Christianity--the fundamentalist literalist brand, which is strongly anti-woman.

          I DO have problems with Paul--or, rather the Paul who constantly tells women to sit down and shut up and obey their husbands because God made them dictators in the home.  I say "the Paul" because most reputable scholars believe that Paul's epistles weren't written by the reformed Saul of Tarsus who had  seizure on the road to Damascus, but by several different men, each with his own point of view and a particular drum to bang.

          I don't hate Christianity or Christians, but object strongly to what has been done to women in the name of Jesus of Nazareth.  HE never demeaned woman.  He treatd women as equals to be respected--and if the Gnostic Gospels have validity (and they have as much claim to it as the ones that made the Official Cut at Nicea), His beloved disciple was a woman he loved deeply (and may have married; that's possibly the ONLY truth in the DaVInci Code--in that time period, a rabbi like Jesus was expected to be married, unless he was an Essene which Jesus wasn't).

          One of my acquaintances summed it up well: "Jesus, Buddha and Mohammed respected and honored women and treated them like equals.  Then their followers, who weren't nearly that enlightened, came along and fucked it all up."

          The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

          by irishwitch on Thu Aug 23, 2007 at 10:52:07 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Well there should be. Chelation should be tried (0+ / 0-)

        first. I was getting chelation one day and an older man came in all smiles and jubilant. He said he had just been to his cardiologist and got the report that he was "clean as a whistle".

        So he elaborated and told us he had been diagnosed and scheduled for a quadruple bypass. He said he told his doctor that he was going to do chelation first and he would keep checking back in with him. He went through either 10 or 20 sessions and then got the all clean signal.

        At that time each sdession was $50 so he either spent $500 or $1000 on chelation. Compared to xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for a quad bypass?

        Now if you were a cardiologist, which one would you prescribe for your patient? Anyway to avoid some TRing around here, I am not advocating chelation over surgery. I am just saying check your options. You can always do the surgery if chelation doesn't do the trick for you.

        The hitch is that the insurance pays for the quad and not for the chelation. Anyone want to take a trip over the border to Mexico?

        Actually NIH is running studies on chelation now.

        FUKUOKA: Part of my purpose is to create a society where no one has to do anything.PARACELSUS:So then, you wormy and lousy Sophist...

        by abbeysbooks on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 12:50:41 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Or maybe a coffee enema. (4+ / 0-)

          Or herbs and weed therapy.  

          Just don't try it too long.  Maybe about two days. :-)  

          A private gyn office offering full gyn services including abortion care to 18 weeks.

          by william f harrison on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 01:09:56 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I was told by an alternative health practioner (0+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            irishwitch

            that a solution of garlic powder in an enema be used before colon irrigation. A person getting chelation who had Hep C told me that of all the remedies she has tried colon cleansing was the most effective.

            FUKUOKA: Part of my purpose is to create a society where no one has to do anything.PARACELSUS:So then, you wormy and lousy Sophist...

            by abbeysbooks on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 01:51:50 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  "Huh?" (2+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            annrose, irishwitch

            Exactly!

            A private gyn office offering full gyn services including abortion care to 18 weeks.

            by william f harrison on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 01:14:45 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Why are you huhing (0+ / 0-)

              Chelation is widely used for lead poisoning which is the only time the insurance companies will pay for it. It strips the arteries and cleans the blood. I have heard that there are oral chelation procedures also that are just as effective but I have not tried them.

              You sit in a room with other people and a bag with I forget what is in it above you and a needle in your vein in your wrist. It flows into your veins drop by drop, the slower the better. Painless. And while you sit there people tell you their stories. You can add vitamins to the solution and if you put in DSM(I think) that will take care of a recluse spider bite.

              One old lady in her mid 80's was there and she told me that years ago she had been diagnosed with _damn I can't remember which eye disease that leads to blindness- by her opthamologist. She came to Sunderwirth, since retired, in practice in Springfield MO and asked him if it would help. He said he had no idea but they could try it. After 10 sessions ($500) she went back to her eye doctor and he told her she had no trace of her former problem. NIH is now finally running studies. They are doing it in Indianapolis so if you are there get in one for free. It is great maintenance and that is why most people are there. It's sort of like taking blood thinners, you can keep eating fatty crap and not suffer the consequences.

              I have met diabetics that go a lot so as to avoid amputations of the feet and legs. I don't know anything about the effectiveness but there are always plenty of them there.

              FUKUOKA: Part of my purpose is to create a society where no one has to do anything.PARACELSUS:So then, you wormy and lousy Sophist...

              by abbeysbooks on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 01:49:11 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  I just think it has too many syllables (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        Womantrust

        to catch on as a slogan. But I'm fine with the semantics. I'm trying to figure out how to express it in a way other people will adopt easily.

        Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

        by elfling on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 03:32:24 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  OUTTA DA PARK ARO! (12+ / 0-)

    My gosh what a wonderful piece!  THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU.

    We need to figure out a way to GUARANTEE that our American daughters have access to professional abortion care.  And our Democratic presidential candidates need to address guaranteeing our AMERICAN DAUGHTERS professional abortion care.  After all, isn't this what we want for our daughter?  And doesn't everyone, including those who are anti the abortion choice for whatever legitimate reason you may have want the health and safety of our women to be preserved????  And doesn't making professional abortion care to all do just that?

    And isn't every American woman and girl who is pregnant and doesn't want to be someone's daughter?

    Great job Ann Rose.  You make me PROUD.

  •  Safe, Legal and Rarely Used (9+ / 0-)

    The real tragedy in the abortion discussions is how "we" have let "them" define life and mess around in the most personal and private of individual matters. When I hear "Pro-Life" I think to myself "yeah! Welcome to the world - now you're on your own." When I hear people talking about being oppposed to abortion, I hear a lot of people deciding what other people should do. Neither of these positions work for me.

  •  Good diary Ann, (9+ / 0-)

    and thanks for all your hard work.  For me, the heart of the messge is 'safe, legal and available' (or accessible) with no qualifiers about 'rarely' - as this still leaves the door open to 'rarify' abortion care in this country- already costing women's lives and sure not something we need more of.  We already know 'rare' is codespeak for never, for the RadRight and those who toady to them.  How about exposing them and their 'policy' of rare for the harm its done and continues to do- and show the damage in 'rare'?  Who gets to define 'rare' and how its defined is critical.
    Isn't that more what we're about?

    •  How about... (4+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      moiv, Beket, irishwitch, Readrock

      "rarely needed".

      There's wiggle room here, but "Rare" in and of itself is a sell-out.

      "Rarely Used" or "Rarely Needed" is a capitulation to hopefully increasing the access to birth control and other societal factors that allow women to become pregnant only when they want to, and to want to have the baby when they do become pregnant.

      Thanks to you, too!!

      HotFlashReport - Opinionated liberal views of the wrongs of the right focusing on abortion and reproductive rights.

      by annrose on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 12:29:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  well we need more than SLOGANS (8+ / 0-)

        We need a task force to discuss access to professional abortion care for all American women.  We need a unified effort to improve quality abortion care.  And it is not rocket science.  We can now do a surgical abortion as early as three weeks with a hand held aspirator in less than five minutes in any doctors office.  But this care is NOT AVAILABLE to many American women because the state has made it impossible to provide...really.

        So yes slogans are important, but we need more.  We need a substantive discussion on how to build quality abortion care into a model that makes it available to all of our daughters.  Because, after all, isn't every woman who seeks abortion care someone's daughter???

  •  Godd diary, ann. But (10+ / 0-)

    I like "Abortion Care should be Safe, Legal, Accessable and Rarely Needed."  I will be posting a diary adressing this with respect to a specific Democratic candidate in the morning at 7:30 a.m. cdt.

    You did a great job of explaining why safe, legal and rare is not working to keep abortion care safe and legal for far too many women and girls.  And we all know what happens when desperate women don't have access to safe legal abortion care.  They resort to unsafe, illegal abortions where both fetus, and too ofen mother, end up dead.

    A private gyn office offering full gyn services including abortion care to 18 weeks.

    by william f harrison on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 12:33:27 PM PDT

  •  Pro-abortion rights is a winning stance (12+ / 0-)

    And I'm so tired of politicans who think they need to appeal to the "right-wing base" on this issue. A majority of Americans, including most Republicans, believe that abortion should be allowed in many circumstances - more than just rape/incest and life endangerment. Democrats who want to win should not hesitate to adopt a meaningful slogan like "safe, legal, available, and rarely needed" or something similar. And then back it up with promises to improve access to abortion care, and implement prevention programs. The two go hand in hand, because human nature means that a lot of women will always need abortions, even if we can reduce the number significantly.

    Thanks for a great diary annrose, you clearly dissected the problem with the word "rare" and the hypocrisy of calling for "safe and legal" while women's lives and health are being compromised right now with restrictive laws.

    To avoid criticism, do nothing, say nothing, be nothing. Elbert Hubbard

    by choice joyce on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 12:51:58 PM PDT

    •  Agree! (6+ / 0-)

      Politicians shouldn't be afraid of it...

      40 Million Women have had abortions.  Speak to them, not at them.  Confirm their choice.  Tell them they're OK.  And in the process, get their vote.

      HotFlashReport - Opinionated liberal views of the wrongs of the right focusing on abortion and reproductive rights.

      by annrose on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 01:01:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And when we factor in the increase (7+ / 0-)

      in population in the last 34 years while abortion national totals remain about the same, its obvious abortion is more 'rare'- proportionately.  And this needs to be pointed out.  Proof that 'rare' prevents abortion?  I think not.  But evidence that with improved sex ed and access to contraception, abortions are 'more rare'.  So, if the goal is 'more rare' with proportionately less abortions needed- how can anyone (candidate or voter) deny the value of sex ed and contraception- with improved funding and access?

      •  Don't you think some of (4+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        annrose, moiv, irishwitch, Readrock

        the "more rare" abortions has to do with fewer abortion providers?

        •  Yes, I do but have to keep in (5+ / 0-)

          mind that these numbers were in place before this juggernaut by the RadRight began.  The emphasis on sex ed and contraception must be recognized for the very real value they play in making the need for abortion 'more rare'.
          While we get this 'over a million abortions every year in the U. S.' shouted from the rooftops, we don't see any mention of the static numbers in spite of population increase due to the accessability of sex ed and contraception.  Nor is there any mention of the main difference since Roe being the elimination of womens deaths from unsafe abortion. So, it should be included in any serious dialogue we have as a way to have 'more rare' abortions- instead of states and SCOTUS mandating, legislating, regulating and restricting access to safe abortion care.

  •  No, never, not a single time... (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    annrose, Readrock

    But I know how lucky I was to get honest education early enough, partners who could keep their heads in the heat of the moment, and enough self-assurance to resist the social pressures to ignore the need for advance planning.

  •  I didn't like "safe legal and rare" in the 90s (7+ / 0-)

    either.  It was for the same reasons that you so eloquently spell out in your diary.  It berates the women and families who have made that choice.

    Something else that I just hate to hear anyone say is what so many of us often hear

    I am pro-choice but I'd never consider an abortion.

     "What?? How do you know?"  I should say, but I never have.  Or maybe I should say, "I know you don't know what you would do if you had an unintended pregnancy, and besides it not important what you think you would do. What is important is that by being pro-choice you trust women to make the decision for themselves based on the conditions of their lives."

    Both of these statements have gone a long way to increase the stigma surrounding abortion.

    •  Agree. (9+ / 0-)

      People can be against abortion today, but when found in the situation...things can change and change fast.

      Alternatively...

      People can be "for" abortion today, but if a pregnancy occurs, suddenly they want a baby.  

      Both are OK...but don't pre-judge or pre-determine what you would do "IF".

      Point being.  You don't know what you'll do until you're in the situation.

      HotFlashReport - Opinionated liberal views of the wrongs of the right focusing on abortion and reproductive rights.

      by annrose on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 01:35:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  My parents thought it was criminal (5+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        Sharoney, annrose, moiv, irishwitch, Readrock

        but when they found out my sister was pregnant all of that changed. The family doctor said if I had just known sooner I could have helped. But my sister hid it until 5 months and then it was too late.

        She ruined her daughter, just ruined a darling little girl. And she never wanted her to have anything that she didn't have.

        You should see my neice. I can only say that she is a carbon xerox of Charlize Theron in her role of the serial murderess, especially when she is in a temper tantrum rage. Uncanny. Fearful.

        FUKUOKA: Part of my purpose is to create a society where no one has to do anything.PARACELSUS:So then, you wormy and lousy Sophist...

        by abbeysbooks on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 02:27:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  sometimes you have both in one pregnancy (11+ / 0-)

        a woman we saw was very anti choice and had participated in events with her Catholic church against us.  She had a couple of kids and was quite smug about her reproductive health history.  She got pregnant again and while it wasn't planned, she and her husband were OK with it.  And they prepared for the new baby.  Well, she was bi-polar and the medicine she was taking was very dangerous for the pregnancy.  She was early and her OB had her go off her meds.  He gave her assurances that the pregnancy would be OK.  And she tried to continue on with the pregnancy without her meds.  But her disease started to spiral out of control and she saw how she was hurting her family.  She decided she need an abortion and needed to go back on her meds.

        When she first came into the clinic she was pretty manic and quite sure she wasn't like the "other" women who were there.  I did the best I could to treat her with respect and listen to her story.  I let her sit privately in an office away from other patients.  We talked about her faith and the fact that she was doing this as an act of defense for herself and for the children she already had.  She agreed and felt she was forgiven.  I reinforced this.  I shared Catholics for a Free Choice information with her and told her I was sorry she had to go through this.  I told her we would get her in and out as quickly as we could.  And I told her to get back on her meds.

        She did great.  She wrote a beautiful letter to us telling us how non-judgemental we were.  She felt bad about having protested us and said if ever we needed help she would be there for us.  She said she was sorry about thinking she was different from the others who needed care.  She realized she was making judgements when she had no idea what other women were going through...

        This woman clearly went from a wanted pregnancy to the need for abortion care over a very short period of time.  So it can happen...you just never know.

        •  The money quote: (2+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          annrose, irishwitch

          She said she was sorry about thinking she was different from the others who needed care.  She realized she was making judgements when she had no idea what other women were going through...

          These women who aid and abet anti-women anti-reproductive freedom organizations don't understand that they are working against their own best interests.

          That may sound patronizing (especially since the same argument has been coopted by the wingnuts to imply that women choosing abortion were brainwashed) but in this case it's absolutely true.

          Hillary Clinton--Destroying the Democratic Party in order to "save" it.

          by Sharoney on Thu Aug 23, 2007 at 07:56:29 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  It's an honest and honorable (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Sharoney

      pro-choice position, to me. I have a friend like that. She would not have aborted a Down Syndrome child (and she worked as a babysitter for one in her teens, so she had a very good idea what raising one would entail), so she didn't have amnio. She'd like her kids to remain virgins till they're in a serious relationship--not for moral reasons but because she worries about HIV--but she talked to them about safe sex and made sure a VERY large box of condoms was in the linen closet where they could snatch one without embarrassment. And she is ardent;y pro-choice because her children are GIRLS and she wants them to have that choice available

      The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

      by irishwitch on Thu Aug 23, 2007 at 10:56:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  "I'm off to Stockholm for my third hysterectomy" (4+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    martianchronic, elfling, moiv, irishwitch

    Anyone remember that great '50s Broadway line?

    Do you have a child? Will you send her to the war?... anon

    by andreww on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 02:04:35 PM PDT

  •  I think this diary is so comprehensive (8+ / 0-)

    that only a high RWA could possibly disagree with it.

    How anyone dares to even think they can make this decision for anyone else is idiotically arrogant.

    There really is nothing to say about this diary except to agree with it completely and I think the talking points suggested for dems is excellent.

    Do another diary about the talking points and make ka point of how to frame, use the word frame, this issue.

    Conceptual Guerilla would love this on his site. Go check him out. He is an expert on framing.

    FUKUOKA: Part of my purpose is to create a society where no one has to do anything.PARACELSUS:So then, you wormy and lousy Sophist...

    by abbeysbooks on Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 02:14:05 PM PDT

  •  you should do this diary as several little ones (5+ / 0-)

    Ann Rose, I think you should do several seperate diaries composed in large part of what you have written here.  It is great but needs to be taken in pieces so more folks will get through it.

    I particularly think you should do a diary on your "risky behaviour" premise.  That is a good one.  

  •  Brilliant and absolutely RIGHT. (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    annrose

    The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

    by irishwitch on Thu Aug 23, 2007 at 10:43:26 AM PDT

Permalink | 53 comments