Common ground discussions on abortion have been pervaded by an eagerness to judge and an unwillingness to understand the complex reasons women choose abortion over childbirth when faced with an unintended pregnancy.
Those who support a woman’s right to choose and those who oppose it should be able to work together to forge common ground for policies that make adoption a genuine choice.
Once again, Waldman twists arguments, avoids stating his own goals, and refers to common ground as “your team versus mine.” Steve: It’s not a competition or a team sport. It’s not about whether you win. It is about real people’s lives, their health and their rights.
Improving adoption policy seems to be a logical plank in a common ground agenda. Pro-choicers ought to like giving women more
options. Pro-lifers have been advocating adoption aid for a while.
Results from an ongoing, 20-year study give us new insight into adoption.
In "Two men, No Uterus," Will
Saletan and Steve Waldman spent as much time as possible complimenting each other’s work and as
little as possible on real substance. In the end they suggest that "common ground" is a political football game based on a fake play.
One of President Obama’s key common ground proposals focuses on making adoption more accessible. But what does that mean? And how do reproductive health and justice advocates work towards accomplishing the goal?
How many adoptees have faced medical misconceptions in regards to adoption? Many of us have grumbled about this issue for decades. We want to hear our medical history from our parents. We do not want to hear it from the state.
Does coercion exist in abortion and adoption? Yes it does. Some say adoption has changed. I say it has not. It has just gotten more sneaky and subtle.
Republicans “lower expectations” for Supreme Court nomination fight; economic insecurity, adoption, and abortion; experts react to the news that percentage of births to unwed mothers has risen sharply; Tennessee abortion amendment passes House.