In talking about abortion, if inaccurate, misleading or ideologically-loaded language is being used, or myths are being held as truths, our communication and understanding is always going to be limited.
When Obama cedes “morality” to those who oppose abortion rights, is he neglecting an opportunity to change the frame of reference, or is it smart politics to throw his opponents a linguistic bone?
“Common ground” political compromises that diminish the ability of women to make decisions about their lives are unacceptable. We should not sacrifice women’s choices just to calm controversy and temper anger over a political issue.
In a war for human dignity, you cannot ask opponents to split the difference.
A “pro-voice” approach has a tremendous amount to offer those of us working for reproductive freedom. But it won’t bring peace, because hard-core anti-choicers are not and never have been in this to protect fetal life.
Laughter is part of so many life experiences, including some of the most intense and challenging ones. Yet when it comes to abortion, humor can seem almost entirely taboo.
For more than 35 years our country’s conversation about abortion has been stoked into a divisive war. I believe abortion peace will exist when each woman who has lived this experience can be supported, not shamed, and public policy reflects what’s best for women’s lives.
To chart a new path in the abortion debate, the next president just needs to listen, and speak, to people who have had abortions. What do you want to hear him say?