Having suggested that pro-life progressives didn't really win much in the platform struggles, I'd like to give equal time here to Jim Wallis, who worked hard to get abortion reduction included and argues that the platform was a "step forward." The nub of his argument:
The platform takes a significant step forward in affirming those whose moral convictions lead them to make a different decision than abortion. It reads, "The Democratic Party also strongly supports a woman's decision to have a child by ensuring access to and availability of programs for pre- and post-natal health care, parenting skills, income support, and caring adoption programs." That position will help make room for people, especially in the religious community, who have strong moral convictions about abortion. Many pro-life Democrats (and there are many in the party) have been looking to be heard, respected, and given a valued space in their own party (as pro-choice Republicans have in their party).There is indeed some chance for common ground here in the mutual respect for different moral convictions and a shared desire to decrease the need for abortion. There is also a deep and growing conviction among evangelicals and Catholics that the "life issues" also extend to the 30,000 children who die globally each day from poverty and preventable disease, issues of genocide in places like Darfur, human trafficking, the domestic issues of poverty and health care, the foreign policy issues of war and peace, and even in threats like climate change. This election provides us with a pivotal opportunity to transcend old polarities and attempt to bring people together on common ground in a "consistent ethic of life" across a range of issues.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
As long as the state blesses the killing of children, there is no hope for the impoverished, the disabled and the dispossessed because, by the defactor outcome of legalized infanticide, they should have been aborted. If you disagree, think about what the 90% abortion rate means for in utero children that are identified as having Downs Syndrome and cleft palate means to those among us with these disabilities. "Luckily, our govenment allows (and facilitates) that 9 out of 10 of you are aborted, but since your inconsiderate parents allowed you to actually be born alive, I guess we'll have to find some funding for you. Hmm, now where is that funding..."
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.