The myth of the born-alive fetus has long been a weapon in the pro-life arsenal, one “kept alive” by misleading language, and by efforts to pass laws that further obfuscate and mislead.
Using theological arguments might be one way to reach a common ground.
Steven Waldman proposes the following hypothetical situation: more premarital sex and fewer abortions. Would pro-lifers accept this trade-off?
Jill Stanek was named "Worst Person" by Keith Olbermann, to which Stanek responded, missing the point entirely.
One begins to suspect that right-wing intransigence is based not just on morality, but on self-interest. If the vitriol isn’t high enough, they worry, their base might drift away.
If anti-choicers really do let Roe out of their sights in favor of other projects that actually will reduce instances of unintended pregnancy, there’s an enormous amount of progress people who oppose abortion rights can make alongside those of us who are pro-choice.
Various anti-choice organizations are all using the same messaging on one very narrow abortion-related issue, is it coordinated? Can it be legally? We’re concerned about the actual sexual and reproductive health policy, not just the election.
The contrasts between the extremist values and tactics of the far-right and those of progressives are being made more clear as the election intensifies.
Jill Stanek admits to the Chicago Tribune she was mistaken about Obama’s record on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.
One far-right leader who attended a private meeting with Sen. Obama describes the candidate’s positions on abortion as “more centrist than expected.”