Most Democrat leaders support abortion until birth

[bmw]

This deserves its own thread. I am challenging RT's assertion that the Democrat party does not believe in the abortion of a viable fetus. Specifically, he said "No it doesn’t believe in that. If by viable you mean can survive outside the mother then no they do not. Most certainly not up to birth for god sakes."

Let's start with the President. Joe Biden will not go on record, even when his press secretary Psaki was pressed on the specific issue of abortion up until birth.

Berine Sanders? He believes that it should be very rare, but that, “The decision over abortion belongs to a woman and her physician, not the federal government, not the state government and not the local government.”

Pete Buttigieg? "that decision is not going to be made any better medically or morally because the government is dictating how that decision should be made.”

Beto O'Rourke? "politicians have no place in these decisions, including these very rare instances."

Other prominent democrats? Who knows. Because they wouldn't answer.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... -abortion/

Amy Klobuchar does support limits on 3rd trimester abortions. She appears to be the exception.

So let's be honest here. At the moment, the Democrat party's position on abortion is that there should be no legal restrictions on it, right up until birth. That's where the party is at, and I challenge anyone to prove otherwise.

[TC Talks]

About six-in-ten Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... t-cases-2/

[Bryce]

About six-in-ten Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... t-cases-2/

In the late 1820's just about every Democrat thought people should be able to own slaves. What's your point?

[bmw]

TCT - Your conclusion as to the data presented by Pew Research doesn't address my contention. And you're combining "all" and "most." Even in the pro-choice crowd, a majority (36/61, or 59%) does believe in some restrictions.

If you dig through the data linked to that Pew Research article, you'll find that:

-Only 19% of Americans believe in no restrictions whatsoever
-Only 8% of Americans believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances

...and most importantly as it pertains to what I'm talking about - a majority - 56% - believe that abortion should be legal early in the pregnancy but at some point become illegal. Add that to the 8% who believe it should be illegal all the time, and you end up with 64% of the population believing that abortion should be illegal just prior to birth.

So if you're suggesting that the Democrat party's absolutist position on abortion is mainstream, I'd suggest that the very data you've linked me to proves your suggestion to be factually incorrect as only 19% of the population shares the view of most Democrat party leaders.

[bmw]

In the late 1820's just about every Democrat thought people should be able to own slaves. What's your point?

An analogy would be "Property rights" are to the 1820s as "Healthcare rights" are to the 2020s. As I've noted before in here, I have high hopes that at some point in the future, people will look back on society's view today on "healthcare rights" as it pertains to abortion the same way we as a society look back at "property rights" as it pertained to slave ownership. I believe the moral equivalency here is the same.

[Rate This]

In the late 1820's just about every Democrat thought people should be able to own slaves. What's your point?

An analogy would be "Property rights" are to the 1820s as "Healthcare rights" are to the 2020s. As I've noted before in here, I have high hopes that at some point in the future, people will look back on society's view today on "healthcare rights" as it pertains to abortion the same way we as a society look back at "property rights" as it pertained to slave ownership. I believe the moral equivalency here is the same.

But nobody is owning anybody else. The property is one’s own body. Your comparison fell apart before it came together.

[bmw]

In the late 1820's just about every Democrat thought people should be able to own slaves. What's your point?

An analogy would be "Property rights" are to the 1820s as "Healthcare rights" are to the 2020s. As I've noted before in here, I have high hopes that at some point in the future, people will look back on society's view today on "healthcare rights" as it pertains to abortion the same way we as a society look back at "property rights" as it pertained to slave ownership. I believe the moral equivalency here is the same.

But nobody is owning anybody else. The property is one’s own body. Your comparison fell apart before it came together.

I said the analogy is one of moral equivalency. Meaning, people in the 1820s viewed black people as personal property as opposed to human lives the same way many today view unborn babies as personal property as opposed to human lives.

[Bryce]

In the late 1820's just about every Democrat thought people should be able to own slaves. What's your point?

An analogy would be "Property rights" are to the 1820s as "Healthcare rights" are to the 2020s. As I've noted before in here, I have high hopes that at some point in the future, people will look back on society's view today on "healthcare rights" as it pertains to abortion the same way we as a society look back at "property rights" as it pertained to slave ownership. I believe the moral equivalency here is the same.

But nobody is owning anybody else. The property is one’s own body. Your comparison fell apart before it came together.

I said the analogy is one of moral equivalency. Meaning, people in the 1820s viewed black people as personal property as opposed to human lives the same way many today view unborn babies as personal property as opposed to human lives.

Spot on! Except most of the people that thought that way were hard core Democrats. They have no more morals on the abortion issues today than they did on slavery in 1828.

[Rate This]

In the late 1820's just about every Democrat thought people should be able to own slaves. What's your point?

An analogy would be "Property rights" are to the 1820s as "Healthcare rights" are to the 2020s. As I've noted before in here, I have high hopes that at some point in the future, people will look back on society's view today on "healthcare rights" as it pertains to abortion the same way we as a society look back at "property rights" as it pertained to slave ownership. I believe the moral equivalency here is the same.

But nobody is owning anybody else. The property is one’s own body. Your comparison fell apart before it came together.

I said the analogy is one of moral equivalency. Meaning, people in the 1820s viewed black people as personal property as opposed to human lives the same way many today view unborn babies as personal property as opposed to human lives.

Spot on! Except most of the people that thought that way were hard core Democrats. They have no more morals on the abortion issues today than they did on slavery in 1828.

Libertarians want all kinds of unfettered access to drugs and a lot of other things society has deemed bad… do they have no morals?

I would give you the Republicans position in 1828 but they didn’t exist yet. But a reminder to the brick wall… the Democrats of 1828 are not the same as those in 2022. Nor are the Republicans of the civil war the same party as those in 2022. Everything switched starting in the 60’s and culminating with Regan. Too bad.

[bmw]

I'm talking specifically about public opinion. Today, the vast, vast majority of people in society view black people as human beings. That wasn't the case in the 1820s. Today, the underlying theme of a pro-choice stance is "my body, my choice." But the very crux of that stance requires either pretending that there's no other life involved, or if you acknowledge that there is one, that it either isn't human, or that the mother's wishes supersede the unborn's rights.

Libertarians only support "other things society has deemed bad" being legal when those other things don't impose on the rights of others. If what you're doing infringes on someone else's rights, a Libertarian would argue that this is when the government can step in. So in the case of abortion, it is a simple question of precisely at what point during pregnancy does an unborn child obtain rights? And when there's competing rights (ie, the mother vs. the baby), then a balancing test is required.

[Deleted User 15846]

[MotorCityRadioFreak]

Most Democratic voters would not support an amendment of abortion up to natural birth. Haven't met a one.

[Rate This]

Most Democratic voters would not support an amendment of abortion up to natural birth. Haven't met a one.

Nor does the subject dominate party meetings and get subjected to hours of planning.