Why should the Democratic party support anti-choice candidates?

Some principles are just so obvious and important that they are more important than winning elections. Reproductive freedom needs to be one of them. The DNC should not send any money to candidates who oppose the fundamental rights of women. I can let slide a Democrat that is anti-union, anti-minimum wage, anti-environment, anti-health-care, pro-war, or maybe even anti racial justice depending on the circumstances. I cannot support a Democrat who is anti-choice. The party must draw the line here and stand up for a right that is even more fundamental than free speech and freedom of the press.

Support a woman's right to choose or go vote with the theocratic Republican party. We don't need you.

I don't mind if someone is pro-life as long as they don't let it influence legislation. I can't let a democrat slide on virtually any of the other things you mentioned.

AtlantaAdonis said:

Some principles are just so obvious and important that they are more important than winning elections. Reproductive freedom needs to be one of them. The DNC should not send any money to candidates who oppose the fundamental rights of women. I can let slide a Democrat that is anti-union, anti-minimum wage, anti-environment, anti-health-care, pro-war, or maybe even anti racial justice depending on the circumstances. I cannot support a Democrat who is anti-choice. The party must draw the line here and stand up for a right that is even more fundamental than free speech and freedom of the press.

Support a woman's right to choose or go vote with the theocratic Republican party. We don't need you.

Click to expand...

The thing is, women's choice is an entirely winnable battle. But too many Democrats, particularly Democratic men, offer a tepid support for it. Whereas many people in the anti-choice camp are infested with a fervor that cannot be underestimated. "THINK OF THE BEH-BEHS!" they say, while willfully neglecting women's health, children's health, and all the risk factors for seeking an abortion in the first place.

If you ask me, we Democrats need to take all the efforts we've been putting into passing gun restrictions and focus them against abortion restrictions. FFS, the majority of this nation is pro-choice!

I'm comfortable with Democrats being the party of nakedly obvious evil.

:shrug:

JayDubya said:

I'm comfortable with Democrats being the party of nakedly obvious evil.

:shrug:

Click to expand...

In relativism there is no real difference between 'good' and 'evil'. So the Democrats are safe.

AtlantaAdonis said:

Some principles are just so obvious and important that they are more important than winning elections. Reproductive freedom needs to be one of them. The DNC should not send any money to candidates who oppose the fundamental rights of women. I can let slide a Democrat that is anti-union, anti-minimum wage, anti-environment, anti-health-care, pro-war, or maybe even anti racial justice depending on the circumstances. I cannot support a Democrat who is anti-choice. The party must draw the line here and stand up for a right that is even more fundamental than free speech and freedom of the press.

Support a woman's right to choose or go vote with the theocratic Republican party. We don't need you.

Click to expand...

You mean you would want women to have the right to chose safe sex!?! Why that is so mean.

joG said:

In relativism there is no real difference between 'good' and 'evil'. So the Democrats are safe.

Click to expand...

Ironic how so many "moral relativists" trend towards being evil little ****s.

AtlantaAdonis said:

Some principles are just so obvious and important that they are more important than winning elections. Reproductive freedom needs to be one of them. The DNC should not send any money to candidates who oppose the fundamental rights of women. I can let slide a Democrat that is anti-union, anti-minimum wage, anti-environment, anti-health-care, pro-war, or maybe even anti racial justice depending on the circumstances. I cannot support a Democrat who is anti-choice.

Click to expand...

So you'll throw all these other groups under the bus, but your rights are the ones that truly matter? I would expect the DNC to support a Democratic candidate that is pro all of those things before a candidate that is anti- any one of them, but if the candidate that ultimately wins a primary and a seat just happens to not be a purist it makes no sense to kick them out of the party all together. We still have more in common with that person than whatever opponent he or she might have, and I like our odds of changing that person's mind a lot better than a right wing nut.

What makes the Republican party so disgusting and dangerous is their unwillingness to accept anything that is not exactly what they want. Everything is there way or the highway. That doesn't mean it's good for Democrats to cave on principles, but it does mean having a big tent, and a willingness to work with all kinds of people on the things where we can find common ground.

The number one reason we're stuck with Trump right now is because too many extremists within the party thought it better to protest against a candidate that was less than perfect in their minds rather than suck it up and support someone who agreed with them 93% of the time.

I couldn't care less what a politician's personal views on abortion are as long as they are against curtailing that right through legislation.

They don't have to. They should, however, support candidates who are personally opposed to abortion but would not attempt to legislatively impose that position on others.

AtlantaAdonis said:

Some principles are just so obvious and important that they are more important than winning elections. Reproductive freedom needs to be one of them. The DNC should not send any money to candidates who oppose the fundamental rights of women. I can let slide a Democrat that is anti-union, anti-minimum wage, anti-environment, anti-health-care, pro-war, or maybe even anti racial justice depending on the circumstances. I cannot support a Democrat who is anti-choice. The party must draw the line here and stand up for a right that is even more fundamental than free speech and freedom of the press.

Support a woman's right to choose or go vote with the theocratic Republican party. We don't need you.

Click to expand...

The problem with this issue is that the left believe's this is a women's rights issue while the right believes that this is a fetus's rights issue - a human life is human life. I like the fact that there are those on both sides who represent one party but don't toe the party line. We have enough gridlock. We need more of this on both sides.

AtlantaAdonis said:

Some principles are just so obvious and important that they are more important than winning elections. Reproductive freedom needs to be one of them. The DNC should not send any money to candidates who oppose the fundamental rights of women. I can let slide a Democrat that is anti-union, anti-minimum wage, anti-environment, anti-health-care, pro-war, or maybe even anti racial justice depending on the circumstances. I cannot support a Democrat who is anti-choice. The party must draw the line here and stand up for a right that is even more fundamental than free speech and freedom of the press.

Support a woman's right to choose or go vote with the theocratic Republican party. We don't need you.

Click to expand...

I think the Democrats should shame and smear every single pro lifer out of the party.

Moderate Right said:

The problem with this issue is that the left believe's this is a women's rights issue while the right believes that this is a fetus's rights issue - a human life is human life. I like the fact that there are those on both sides who represent one party but don't toe the party line. We have enough gridlock. We need more of this on both sides.

Click to expand...

There are only two sides here: Either you are pro-choice or you are anti-choice. You either think women are people who deserve basic rights or that they are just baby incubators.

AtlantaAdonis said:

There are only two sides here: Either you are pro-choice or you are anti-choice. You either think women are people who deserve basic rights or that they are just baby incubators.

Click to expand...

Who's anti-choice? They make the choice, when they opt against abstinence and safe sex.

MrPeanut said:

I don't mind if someone is pro-life as long as they don't let it influence legislation. I can't let a democrat slide on virtually any of the other things you mentioned.

Click to expand...

Actually, a person that is religiously against abortion will very often be obliged to demand legislation forbidding it. If she doesn't, she forfeits her own salvation as an accessory to mass murder. At least this is the formal position of the largest religion.

AtlantaAdonis said:

There are only two sides here: Either you are pro-choice or you are anti-choice. You either think women are people who deserve basic rights or that they are just baby incubators.

Click to expand...

Ummmmm. Women choose to be baby incubators. They can choose not to be baby incubators by using birth control. It is a choice as to whether you believe in women's rights or fetus's rights. Believe it or not, some people are opposed to murder.

AtlantaAdonis said:

Some principles are just so obvious and important that they are more important than winning elections. Reproductive freedom needs to be one of them. The DNC should not send any money to candidates who oppose the fundamental rights of women. I can let slide a Democrat that is anti-union, anti-minimum wage, anti-environment, anti-health-care, pro-war, or maybe even anti racial justice depending on the circumstances. I cannot support a Democrat who is anti-choice. The party must draw the line here and stand up for a right that is even more fundamental than free speech and freedom of the press.

Support a woman's right to choose or go vote with the theocratic Republican party. We don't need you.

Click to expand...

I don't know anyone who supports anti-choice candidates. I do know a lot of people who support pro-not killing your unborn children candidates.

joG said:

Actually, a person that is religiously against abortion will very often be obliged to demand legislation forbidding it. If she doesn't, she forfeits her own salvation as an accessory to mass murder. At least this is the formal position of the largest religion.

Click to expand...

Sure, but plenty of people do it. I'm not as concerned with the religious hypocrisy of someone who is pro-life deciding not to push for abortion bans as I am with someone deciding to push their religious views on when life begins on the rest of the public.

AtlantaAdonis said:

Some principles are just so obvious and important that they are more important than winning elections. Reproductive freedom needs to be one of them. The DNC should not send any money to candidates who oppose the fundamental rights of women. I can let slide a Democrat that is anti-union, anti-minimum wage, anti-environment, anti-health-care, pro-war, or maybe even anti racial justice depending on the circumstances. I cannot support a Democrat who is anti-choice. The party must draw the line here and stand up for a right that is even more fundamental than free speech and freedom of the press.

Support a woman's right to choose or go vote with the theocratic Republican party. We don't need you.

Click to expand...

There are several reasons, one of them is told in the book "Crashing the Gate," by Markos Moulitsas. A goal should be to take the majority -- even if that means that the party is a coalition of people who have different beliefs on one issue. Even Democrats who don't believe in reproductive choice, will still vote for the Democrat as Speaker of the House and Majority Leader of the Senate.

The second reason is that Democrats don't have to be Stepford Wives, and vote in lock-step. Very liberal Bernie Sanders has a relaxed view of gun ownership. We aren't going to kick him out of the party because we generally disagree.

AtlantaAdonis said:

There are only two sides here: Either you are pro-choice or you are anti-choice. You either think women are people who deserve basic rights or that they are just baby incubators.

Click to expand...

Yeah there really are only two sides: bigoted, irrational pro-aborts vs. folks who are at least potentially decently educated and moral.

I'm just fine with the socialist party pigeonholing itself as the party of bigoted idiocy, as you propose.