Ellen Goodman's piece in today's Boston Globe offers a stunning revelation. I say "stunning" because you wonder how anyone could have overlooked it once she makes the point...
Reporting on a recent Yale Law School conference about gay rights and abortion as cultural wedge issues, she raises an important question
Stanford law professor Pam Karlan was the first to compare changes in the last two decades. "Gays have come out of the closet," she said, "and women who've had abortions have gone back into the closet."
The long, slow process of "going back in" has meant, in Karlan's words, that "we don't always know that we know someone who's had an abortion." Has the invisibility of these women made it easier to chip away at their rights?
Focusing on TV as a mirror of cultural norms, she reminds us that almost twenty years ago, "Thirtysomething" was boycotted because of its sympathic portrayal of a gay character in one scene. I would add that thirty years ago, the ground breaking sit-com "Soap" went even further. They had the audacity to have a major character who was gay. Even more audacious, they portrayed him in a positive and sympathetic light. The show was famous for attacking cultural hypocrisy about sex, infidelity, interracial marriage, and gay parenting. The last topic proved one too many. Although the show had weathered years of attack, the Moral Majority made sure the show was aborted in 1981.
When it comes to portrayals of gays in the media, times have changed. There is nothing shocking or surprising about shows with openly gay characters now. Even critically acclaimed shows like "Mad Men" ... a show set in the 1960's ... is exploring the role of homosexuality with sensitivity and compassion.
Abortion, on the other hand, is quite a different story.
Today, as Yale historian George Chauncey says, "There are many sympathetic gay characters on TV and the movies." But, he adds, "almost no sympathetic characters who are getting abortions." Hollywood's heroines from "Juno" to "Waitress" to "Knocked Up" barely think about it.
This sets the stage for Karlan's stunning observation.
Because we rarely see real women, it's easy to forget that one out of every three American women has had an abortion by the time she's 45. As Karlan said, "Look to your right. Look to your left. One of you has had an abortion." Because we rarely hear from women, it's easy to forget that over half those women already have children and are making their decisions in that family context.
Abortion was legalized on the grounds of the right to privacy. And so it remains private. But the more private it is, the more we think it only happens to someone else, someone "unlike us." The more unlike us she is, the less public support there is for the right. Abortion rights slip away as the woman slips out of sight.
The irony here is that an entire generation has been raised in a country where abortions were legal and the right to privacy was protected. For them, it is the way things have always been. But the stories of women who came of age before Roe are truly terrifying. There was a time when a simple coat hanger could send a chill up a woman's spine. That is what prompted me to create the image for this campaign, and to put it on T-shirts and bumper stickers.
Losing control of the debate means losing control of your rights. Losing control of your rights means losing control over your own body. Those who forget history will be forced to repeat it.
As McCain's campaign circles the drain, this issue has gained prominence. If you think that message is not being delivered to the party faithful, you are wrong. I have been canvassing in Virginia for the last few weeks and recently I've started to come across people talking about Obama as "pro-abortion" in my canvassing. A few weeks ago, these would have been the people saying "the Muslim thing" was their biggest problem. I find that very disturbing. This is a red meat issue that will inflame the base... and we know exactly how virulent that can be. One need only look to clinic bombings and other acts of domestic terrorism to imagine what can be unleashed here.
That is why Obama's response to this topic in the final debate was critical. As he correctly noted, no one is "pro abortion." By the same token, being anti-abortion is not all it takes to be pro life. There is more to the equation as Obama noted in the final debate. This is particularly important among Catholic voters. I am heartened to hear his comments did not fall on deaf ears.
Doug Kmiec, a Catholic and a professor of law, addressed this issue directly in today's LA Times in response to Obama's statements.
Abortion is "always a tragic situation," he [Obama] said, and we should "try to prevent unintended pregnancies by providing appropriate education to our youth, communicating that sexuality is sacred ... and providing options for adoption and helping single mothers if they want to choose to keep the baby. ... Nobody is pro-abortion. ... We should try to reduce these circumstances."
On those words the election may turn. Some Republicans are telling Catholics that supporting Obama is a sin. Catholics are instructed not to cast a ballot for an advocate of abortion, but these partisans overstate the church's teaching to make an even broader claim: Namely, that a pro-choice candidate is off-limits too.
This is a dramatic change from the last election, when Catholics were actively disowning Kerry - a pro-choice Catholic. Kmiec doesn't do this by turning his back on the unborn or even compromising his personal convictions, he reaches this position by pointing out the GOP is misleading the faithful with it's claim to be "pro-life" and therefore morallly superior
Some might ask, isn't John McCain, the self-proclaimed "pro-lifer," still a morally superior choice for Catholics? Not necessarily. McCain's commitment, as he stressed in the debate, is to try to reverse Roe vs. Wade. But Republicans have been after this for decades, and the effort has not saved a single child. Even if Roe were reversed -- unlikely, in my judgment -- it merely transfers the question to the states, most of which are not expected to ban abortion. A Catholic serious about preserving life could reasonably find Obama's educational and material assistance to mothers the practical, stronger alternative.
In the end, Kmiec asks and answers the critical question for Catholics:
So can Catholics vote for a pro-choice candidate? The answer is yes.
Simply stating that position is not enough. We have to do more. Now is the time for those who seek a sensible approach to this divisive debate to act. We need to stand up and declare the days of pushing women into the closet are over. Like slavery, those days are never coming back. At the same time, we have to follow Obama's lead and extend a genuine offer to find common ground. Ending the culture wars will do more than change the electoral map, it will help heal this nation. That's a goal we can all support.