Steven Waldman

The Most Important Policy Phrase in the Obama Notre Dame Speech

Sunday May 17, 2009

In terms of actual abortion policy, the key phrase in Obama's Notre Dame speech (full text here) was not inspiring or poetic. It was his specific call to "reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies."

In the past, Obama has rhetorically sided with pro-choice activists in saying he wanted to reduce "the need" for abortion. Pro-lifers pushed to change the language so it called for a reduction in "the number." Obama said point blank that he wants to reduce the number.

Why does this matter? A White House task force consisting of pro life and pro choice activists has begun meeting to hammer out a "common ground" proposal. In the past, pro-choicers have said that establishing abortion reduction as a goal stigmatized women, that government should be neutral on the question of whether abortion was bad or not. Saying you want to reduce the number means you think abortion is, from a society-wide perspective, undesirable. Obama's statement gives some moral support to the pro-lifers in the room.

It also marks for Obama a return to his campaign formulations -- began in the Democratic platform -- that paired abortion reduction with efforts to make it easier for women who do want to carry babies to term. Until today, Obama's rhetoric as President had tilted in the purist pro-choice direction, somewhat leaving his pro-life allies out on a limb. Today, he climbed out there on the limb with them.

It remains to be seen what this task force will actually produce but Obama appeared to lay out the contours of the deal he'd like to see:

"So let's work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoption more available, and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term. Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded in clear ethics and sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women."

Pro-choicers get: abortion remaining legal, stem cell research loosened up, efforts get focused on encouraging changed behavior rather than legal punishments

Pro-lifers get: abortion reduction as an explicit goal, conscience clause, and an acknowledgement in abortion policy that women who want to carry babies to term should be helped just as much as those who don't want to.

Still, all we have is rhetoric, but we may have heard today the roadmap for how that will eventually get translated into a policy compromise.

UPDATE: On re-reading the language, at Tom's suggestion, I think I may have over-stated the significance of the wording on numbers vs. need. Dan Gilgoff at US News had a better distinction:


Though the Obama White House has been publicly quiet in recent months about its previously stated commitment to reducing demand for abortion--some aides have encouraged the news media to describe the administration's plan for "pregnancy prevention" rather than "abortion reduction"--Obama yesterday gave a full-throated reaffirmation of his intentions to that end.


Importantly, Obama mentioned two policy proposals around abortion--increasing availability of adoption and increasing assistance to pregnant women who carry their babies to term--that go way beyond pregnancy prevention. Though the White House has carefully avoided embracing any of the Democratic legislative vehicles for reducing demand for abortion, these two proposals are enshrined in the Pregnant Women Support Act, which was recently reintroduced by Democratic lawmakers in Congress and which has won robust support from the Roman Catholic Church.

Advertisement
Comments
Panthera
May 18, 2009 2:25 PM

Valid point, Tim.

After several decades of this nasty little battle-front in the culture wars, it is clear that the fundamentalist Christians don't care a bean about actually protecting young women - all they care about is forcing them into a position of absolute subservience.

Especially troubling are the ones like those charming folks commenting here who truly enjoy seeing a young woman endure the consequences of having sex. The fact that she may have been raped or suffered incest or didn't have the resources to practice contraception is irrelevant. As long as she is punished, they are happy.

Your Name
May 18, 2009 2:36 PM

To anonymous 2:

How can you hate so completely? Nothing is perfect. Everybody has an opinion! Noone has to agree with you! Grow-up! Get a life because now you are lost! And Jesus said " the weeds will be burned."

RJohnson
May 18, 2009 3:57 PM

"Especially troubling are the ones like those charming folks commenting here who truly enjoy seeing a young woman endure the consequences of having sex. The fact that she may have been raped or suffered incest or didn't have the resources to practice contraception is irrelevant. As long as she is punished, they are happy."

This view is the natural result of a literalist approach to Scripture. Eve is condemned to suffer childbirth for her role in the Fall.

Gen. 3:17 " Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."

Childbirth is punishment for the sin that led to the Fall, and anything that changes that interferes with God's divine order, at least in the mind of a literalist reader of the Bible.

Thus you have folks who blame only the woman for obtaining an abortion, or believe it is the woman who is the sinner when it comes to unwed pregnancy.

And to think...they accused Obama of saying that pregnancy was a punishment.

Brenda
May 18, 2009 11:54 PM

adding to all of this.....Obama is addressing to a diverse of people. He needs to make a solution that will satisfy all of the people of the US. As Your Name said "Everybody has an opinion!"

Your Name
May 19, 2009 12:41 PM

Pro-choicers always throw out the "12 year old girl who was raped by her stepfather" argument for preserving abortion rights. You know, if only 12 year old incest victims were getting abortions, there wouldn't be a problem. The number would be so small as to escape notice. It's the majority-- educated white women in their 20's-- who would be left out. How about this for a compromise-- pro-lifers embrace abortion for rape and incest victims, and pro-choicers work to limit it to only those victims.
I personally oppose abortion from an anthropological, evoluntionary reasons. It's not good for a population to kill off 1/4 of it's future population. You never know what form evolution will take-- our species needs all the genetic diversity we can get.

Read All Comments

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.



Please type the text you see in the box below to verify your post and help us prevent spam. You have a limited time to type - you may wish to compose your comment in a separate document and paste it here upon completion.

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Advertisement

Search This Blog

feed icon Subscribe

RSS Feed

Receive updates from Steven Waldman

Calendar

Advertisement

Advertisement


About Beliefnet

Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness. More about Beliefnet.

Legal

Copyright © Beliefnet, Inc. and/or its licensors. All rights reserved. Use of this site is subject to Terms of Service and to our Privacy Policy. Constructed by Beliefnet.

Advertisement

Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.