Obama latest words on abortion are still problematic

This may be overkill, but some folks may have overlooked the historical and legal framework that makes even Senator Obama's latest position worrisome to the pro-choice community and to those, like me, who believe that a woman's health is a matter only for her and her physician.
So here's a final attempt to get the point over by pointing folks to a nice recent post by Frank James at The Swamp. The senator may still have some clarification to do to get everyone on the same page.

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/pol itics/blog/2008/07/obamas_lateterm_abort ion_probl.html

Quoting from a colleague with a legal background, James writes:

<>Subsequent cases in the Supreme Court and lower courts have said states cannot ban abortions where the doctor deems them necessary to protect a woman's physical and mental health. Lower courts have taken that to mean a state cannot prohibit an abortion--even one post-viability--if the woman would suffer severe emotional harm without it. Nowhere do those cases impose criteria of "serious clinical mental health diseases."
That's not what the law is today. The Court has said the Constitution prohibits states from banning post-viability abortions unless those laws contain a broad mental health exception---one that includes mental distress and severe emotional harm. Abortion rights groups have fought for decades to preserve these exceptions, and I'm awfully curious what they will think about limiting them to women with mental disease or mental illness./



Display:


Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (none / 0)

The Jan Greenburg post, which the swamp links to, gets to the real problem with Obama's "refining":

In clarifying his remarks, Obama said this afternoon that he has "consistently" said health exceptions are required for laws banning or seriously restricting abortion. But he then goes on to try to carve out exceptions to the exceptions, and he ends up suggesting, again, he would support more limits on abortion than the law currently allows.

After thirty years of conservative courts a woman's right to choose is already too restricted. The 2003 Federal Abortion Ban, and the 2007 Supreme Court ruling that it is constitutional, dealt a serious blow to efforts to preserve choice. No pro-choice politician advocates restricting the right, we are fighting to preserve and expand it.


by souvarine on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 12:08:52 PM EST

Sorry to Inform you (none / 0)

deciding you dont want a healthy fetus at 8 months with no actual health concerns is not supported by the nominee.  I would call it murder, but thats just me. Pro choice, like most rights is not absolute.


"Is there no keeping with class in whom we mingle with anymore?"
by Brandon on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 12:24:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry to Inform you (2.00 / 1)

Brandon, as usual you speak with next to zero knowledge on this subject.

Like when you claimed there is a federal ban on late term abortions.

Nobody goes in for an abortion at 8 months.


He was warmly received by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who called him "a leader that God has blessed us with at this time."
by roxfoxy on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 12:53:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry to Inform you (none / 0)

And please do find me the woman who in the 8 month of pregnancy opted for tghe abortion of a perfectly healthy fetus, then the doctor who performed it and the state for which it was allowed.  


formerly bookgirl
by masslib1 on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 11:05:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (none / 0)

The real problem with Obama's "refining" is that he is being forced to "refine"...  He is pro-choice.  He has voted pro-choice consistently (spare me the "present" vote bullshit, I'm not in the mood).  He helped to raise money to defeat the most anti-choice measure in the country to face a public vote in South Dakota.  But, the concerns about his pro-choice chops continue... Why is this...?  He has a position on the issue that is actually to the left of the majority of Americans on late-term abortion... still people are concerned.

Silliness abounds, I suppose.  Obama is pro-choice decidedly.  I have absolutely no fear for the future of Roe v. Wade under his leadership an I am fairly militant on this issue.  The same cannot be said for McCain of course.


Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...
by JenKinFLA on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 12:30:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion (2.00 / 1)

Read the Greenburg piece. I can't tell if Obama just doesn't know what he is talking about or if he intends to restrict choice. Every indication from what Obama has said recently, including his clarification, suggests that he wants to restrict choice. Brandon, above, thinks he wants to restrict choice. I would argue, if you look at the whole of Obama's record on the question, that Brandon is correct.

Given how central choice is to women's civil liberties, and to the civil liberties of GLBT and other disfavored communities, I am sure the Obama campaign is getting enormous private push-back from the womens and GLBT groups. His campaign's usually sophisticated polling operation is no doubt showing how dangerous flirtation with pro-life positions is to his coalition. So politically, regardless of his personal inclinations, I expect to see him walk further back from restricting choice.


by souvarine on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 12:44:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

so NARAL is anti-choice now? (none / 0)

Obama position is 100% consistent with NARAL and Roe.  Mental distress does not constitute mental illness.  

A woman has the right to control her body, but that right is not absolute when it comes to a viable fetus.  A fetus post-viability has some limited rights.  If the woman's health is threatened, her right to control her body overrides the rights of the fetus.  Otherwise, the fetus should be carried to term.

That's what Roe/Casey says.  


McCain = Iraq. John McCain = overturn Roe.
by PantsB on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 02:53:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (2.00 / 1)

Two more things:

Words Matter.

The Supreme Court, not Obama, determines the scope of the right to choose. I have no insight into the sort of judges Obama would appoint, but lately he has been aligning himself with Scalia, Alito and Thomas.


by souvarine on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 12:49:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

that's a stretch. (none / 0)


by semiquaver on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 12:57:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: that's a stretch. (2.00 / 2)

Thats more then a stretch, that's a leap into the chasm of silly.

Obama has said, he wants to appoint judges in the mold of Ginburg and Souter.

McCain wants Antonin Scalia X3.

Puma's are SO disengeniuous about this.


"Well the danger on the rocks is surely past... Still I remain tied to the mast"...Don Fagen, Poet and Piano Player
by WashStateBlue on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 02:38:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What?? (none / 0)

"but lately he has been aligning himself with Scalia, Alito and Thomas."

Oh, he's saying Roe needs to be overturned now?

His views are in line with NARAL, most other Democrats AND I'm willing to bet all nine SCOTUS justices.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 01:08:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (none / 0)

If you think he is even in the same zip code ideologically with Scalia, Thomas, and Alito, you clearly need to read up what he is ACTUALLY saying as opposed to various netroot or media interpretations of it.

He is polar opposite in view to those gentlemen.


Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...
by JenKinFLA on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 04:07:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (none / 0)

Obama ACTUALLY agreed with Scalia, Thomas, and Alito, and took issue with Stevens, Breyer and Ginsberg, on DC v Heller and Kennedy v. Louisiana, two recent Supreme Court Bill of Rights cases.

He may disagree with Scalia, Thomas and Alito on some points, but recently he has taken their positions on an important series of civil liberties issues. I don't see how you can claim he is their polar opposite, given his recent statements. If he believes we should restrict the health of the mother provisions of Roe and Doe then he agrees with them on that as well.


by souvarine on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 04:17:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

DC v. Heller (none / 0)

was a serious civil liberty issue?


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 08:20:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: DC v. Heller (none / 0)

Yes, the interpretation of the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms, is a civil liberty issue.


by souvarine on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 09:35:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

and how exactly (none / 0)

did DC v. Heller curtail civil liberites?


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 09:55:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: and how exactly (none / 0)

Obama agreed with Scalia, Alito and Thomas on DC v. Heller. How DC v. Heller affects civil liberties is a different discussion entirely, one I have made no claim about in this diary.


by souvarine on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 10:37:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

i see (none / 0)

so agreeing with Scalia, Alito and Thomas is enough to be wrong? That is about the most ignorant argument I've ever heard.

Well, I happened to agree with Scalia, Alito and Thomas concerning DC v. Heller.

Why? Because the ruling EXPANDS civil liberites, whether or not it's fair to do so, but allowing residents of Washington D.C. the right to own handguns.

You know, sometimes you need to look an issue instead of making a judgement based on who supports it.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 10:42:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: i see (none / 0)

It seems to me that if you and Obama agree with Scalia, Alito and Thomas on an issue, and disagree with Stevens, Ginsberg and Breyer, then you cannot be called the "polar opposite in view" to Scalia, Alito and Thomas. You might even be in the same ideological zip code as them on that issue.

If you and Obama agree with Scalia, Alito and Thomas on a series of issues, and disagree with Stevens, Ginsberg and Breyer, then there is reason to wonder exactly how far you are, ideologically, from Scalia, Alito and Thomas.


by souvarine on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 11:06:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Maybe (none / 0)

I'm not all that far from them.

Yes, I agree with Scalia, Alito, Thomas and disagree with Stevens and Breyer on guns and abortion. (with the latter, not because I think it should be illegal, but because I don't agree with how Roe was decided...although I'm personally opposed to abortion as well, I'm cool with it being legal).

I do not agree with them on fiscal policies, the power of the executive, seperation of church and state, gay rights, and a score of other issues.

Shocking isn't it?


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 11:19:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Maybe (none / 0)

Hey, maybe even Obama isn't all that far from them on some issues. Seems to me it is reasonable to wonder how far the judges he would nominate would be from them.

I'm not arguing that Scalia, Alito and Thomas's positions are illegitimate, but in most cases I agree with Stevens, Breyer and Ginsberg rather than them. I would prefer to know more about where Obama stands in relation to them, than less.


by souvarine on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 11:39:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

In most cases (none / 0)

Obama also agrees with them...do some research instead of cherrypicking one or two issues.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 11:48:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: In most cases (none / 0)

That is exactly what this diary is, research into where Obama stands on Roe and Doe. Obama carved out exceptions to the Doe health exception for late-term abortions in his clarification. How far does he intend to go? Would the judges that he nominates also carve out exceptions to Roe and Doe? Or is the "constitutional law professor" just making up constitutional law as he goes along?


by souvarine on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 12:07:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

How far will he go? (none / 0)

About as far as every other Democrat, including Hillary Clinton and Russ Feingold. The latter of whom agrees with him.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 06:58:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (none / 0)

I prefer my Pumas on my feet, not on my interwebs.


Tony Romo for Secretary of Awesome
by kasjogren on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 06:52:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Again, "mental distress" (2.00 / 2)

is different from "mental illness" or "mental disease".

If you're so worried about Obama's position, are you saying we should vote for McCain, who wants to overturn Roe altogether?


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 12:32:06 PM EST

Just wondering (2.00 / 1)

While the fringe groups continue to duke it out over this issue, I'm wondering if anyone gives a good God damn what the majority of Americans think and want?

Because, like gun control, the majority of Americans would like some BALANCED policy on abortion -- unlimited choice before the fetus is viable -- restrictions once it is.   MAke sense?  Because it does to most of the rest of us -- perfect GD sense.  And it is to the growing frustration of reasonable Americans that the uncompromising on both ends of the spectrum insist on pushing their arguments on the rest of us.

http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.ht m

Note how only 28% of Americans feel abortion should be legal in all cases, 17% feel it should always be illegal and a whopping 54% feel it should be legal in SOME CASES.  What might some of those conditions be?  Age of the fetus, exceptions for rape and incest, exceptions for the health of the mother, known birth defects.  

When it comes to "partial birth" or third trimester abortions, the Left is willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater, pardon the pun.  The vast majority of Americans DO NOT WANT third trimester abortions on demand.  And continuing to demand that, or demand it of a candidate to pass the pro-choice litmus test is counterproductive and absurd.    The majority doesn't buy into the idiotic "slippery slope" argument and they find the procedure itself abhorrant and intolerable except to literally SAVE the life of the mother.

When the first abortion wars were being waged, few envisioned the "partial birth abortion" or the day when premature infants would be saved and thrive at 24 weeks.  

Everyone is free to have an opinion on this, but I honesty believe Obama authentically shares the opinion of the MAJORITY on this one -- complete choice to a point, then tough restrictions once the fetus is viable.  That hardly makes him "anti-choice" or an enemy of Roe vs Wade. It makes him reasonable, compassionate and in-tune with the majority of Americans.  


Sexism is real.
by grassrootsorganizer on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 12:49:34 PM EST

Re: Just wondering (none / 0)

and the MAJORITY also, if it became personal to them, would probably also tell the US gov't to butt out of their personal, private business.


by colebiancardi on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 12:52:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just wondering (2.00 / 1)

If you want to call NARAL, Planned Parenthood and NOW "fringe groups" that is up to you.

I'd like more clarity from Obama on where he really stands on choice. I think you have a strong case that he does in fact favor legal restrictions on choice, and that he does not agree with the Roe and Doe holdings that the decision rests with only the woman and her doctor in all cases.


by souvarine on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 12:54:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (none / 0)

As president, Barack Obama will not be crafting legislation. Whether it is for limiting choice or any other issue. What he will be doing is appointing SC justices. Do those of you complaining about two words used by Obama in an interview with a Christian magazine think it outweighs his entire political career and everything he has ever done or said about abortion before now? Do you think he will be appointing SC justices who will favor overturning Roe v Wade? Do you think McCain will be appointing justices who will support choice? Get a grip, people.


"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson
by MS01 Indie on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 12:53:14 PM EST

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (2.00 / 1)

I can see him nominating moderate judges who want to  "get beyond the culture wars of the '60s and '70s" and will look for empathetic compromises on choice. Judges not too different from Anthony Kennedy. Given the justices likely to retire in the next presidential term, Stevens and Ginsberg, such a justice would be part of a majority substantially overturning Roe v Wade, yes.

But then he gives speeches like his Planned Parenthood speech last month and I have no idea what he would do.

Speaking at the Planned Parenthood conference in DC this afternoon, Barack Obama leveled harsh words at conservative Supreme Court justices, and he offered his own intention to appoint justices with "empathy." Obama hinted that the court's recent decision in Gonzales v. Carhart -- which upheld a ban on partial-birth abortion -- was part of "a concerted effort to steadily roll back" access to abortions. And he ridiculed Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote that case's majority opinion. "Justice Kennedy knows many things," he declared, "but my understanding is that he does not know how to be a doctor."


by souvarine on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 01:05:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (none / 0)

That speech was from last July.  He'll be with Hillary before a woman's group for a fundraiser and I'm pretty sure some of them, including Hillary herself, will have some questions for him about his recent comments.  I'm wondering if they'll close it off from all press poolers, if Obama is indeed going to give them the wink and nod.


by Blazers Edge on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 01:12:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (2.00 / 1)

Right, thanks, MSNBC's "Filed Under: Democrats, 2008" always tricks me.

I would feel much more confident if he said anything like this in the General Election.


by souvarine on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 01:17:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (2.00 / 1)

Wow, you are really pulling this out of your backside (but, no surprise there.)

Obama has NEVER WAVERED from saying he wants to appoint judges like Ginsburg, Souter, etc.

Check out Cass Sunstein some time. My take is, he's sitting in black robes, balancing Alito and Roberts for the next 30 years.


"Well the danger on the rocks is surely past... Still I remain tied to the mast"...Don Fagen, Poet and Piano Player
by WashStateBlue on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 02:41:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (none / 0)

Cass Sunstein thinks Roe v. Wade went too far too fast and generated a backlash:

I think the Court should've said, in the Texas and Georgia cases [pertaining to Roe v. Wade], that these laws are so draconian in their reach that they're unconstitutional. The Texas law didn't allow abortion in cases of rape. So the court could've said very narrowly that we're not going to say anything general about what the Constitution says with respect to abortion -- but women who have been raped have a right to have an abortion. The Georgia law had procedural hurdles for women seeking abortions that seemed to intrude on women's interests and went well beyond what was necessary to make sure that the decision was reasonable and well-considered. The court could've said simply that the Texas law didn't have an exception in cases of rape, and the Georgia law went far beyond what is reasonable and necessary to protect fetal life. And that way there would've been a continuing dialogue between the states and the Supreme Court on the abortion issue.

He would ground abortion in an equality argument, and scale back the protections Roe and Doe put forth.


by souvarine on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 03:40:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (none / 0)

He's also looking at the current state of freedom of reproductive rights in the US?

We are very much in a Seperate and UnEqual stance right now.  

There was a PBS frontline special called something like "The last Clinic" talking about how state legislatures have used there powers to basically make Abortion defacto illegal in most of the south, at least, the rural south?

In his larger argument, Sunnstein reads Roe V Wade as the political gift that keeps on giving to the Religious Right, and particularly on the constituional grounds that it was decided on?

The implied privacy right basis for Roe has allowed the Federalists and the other right wing hacks to have a 30 year argument against Roe.

Sunnstien thinks a decision based on equality. the banning abortion penalizes only CERTAIN classes of people most harshly, has a better chance of standing the test of time.

But, it will be interesting. Both Roberts and Alito claimed to be strong believers in Stare Decisis, but have shown NO such allegenance when actually rulling on the bench.

Take away Ginsburg, or Stevens, and I think they DO overturn Roe.

I think Roberts wants to make his bones, make his court historic. The biggest target is, of course, Roe.

Despite the PUMA cognitive dissonance about "The senate would block those judges" that McCain would appoint, chances are good, with 3 cracks at it, he would finally flip the majority to kill Roe.

Of course Harriet and her cadre of older angry white woman would celebrate, they would TRULY have punished those young folks for turning on Hillary and supporting Obama.

How glorious a day for the PUMA movement when Roe is overturned, what smiles of vindication they will have.


"Well the danger on the rocks is surely past... Still I remain tied to the mast"...Don Fagen, Poet and Piano Player
by WashStateBlue on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 05:54:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (none / 0)

Sunstein's argument that overturning Roe would ultimately be good for liberals is a real stretch to me. And see no reason to believe that he would not stick to his principles and be part of a majority overturning Roe, regardless of his current denials. He has a number of opinions like this, noted recently by BTD, where he argues for meeting Republicans half-way on fundamental differences, that sound very much like Barack Obama's ideas. Those compromises would be an anathema to liberals for good reason, and the rulings of Roberts and Alito, two justices Sunstein supported but now admits he misjudged, show why.

This is one reason the SCARY MCCAIN JUDGES argument is weak. Obama would very likely nominate judges like Sunstein, exactly as you advocate, and  a Democratic congress would give Obama the benefit of the doubt and approve those nominations. Those judges would very likely compromise on Roe v. Wade, overturning the privacy grounds that Sunstein finds so objectionable.

A Democratic congress would never approve any pro-life justices McCain might nominate.


by souvarine on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 06:25:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (none / 0)

"A Democratic congress would never approve any pro-life justices McCain might nominate."

Roberts and Alito sound like familar names?

Associate Justice Orin Hatch.  Watch the senators kiss the butt of one of their own.


"Well the danger on the rocks is surely past... Still I remain tied to the mast"...Don Fagen, Poet and Piano Player
by WashStateBlue on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 06:35:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (none / 0)

Roberts and Alito were approved by Republican Congresses.

One thing I should clarify, there are other choice related arguments where Obama is the much better candidate, but the judges argument looks particularly weak to me.


by souvarine on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 06:39:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Clarence Thomas (none / 0)

was approved by a Democratic Senate.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 10:44:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Newsflash! (none / 0)

Barack Obama's position is as or more progressive than Russ Feingold's, who found the "serious adverse health consequences" exception to the so-called "partial birth" abortion bill to be "too broad."


by Brad G on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 01:06:30 PM EST

Re: Newsflash! (none / 0)

Yet, not as progressive as John Kerry, or Dick Durbin's.  Certainly not as progressive as Barbara Boxer, Hillary Clinton, or Diae Feinstien.  Honestly, what the hell is the point of referencing Feingold?  Mind that was 1997, 11 years ago.


formerly bookgirl
by masslib1 on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 11:07:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The point (none / 0)

Even the most liberal politicians have their sins, and Russ Feingold is no exception.  That doesn't mean we shouldn't consider them because of a nuance on one issue.


by Brad G on Mon Jul 07, 2008 at 11:06:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama latest words on abortion are still probl (none / 0)

Oh, goody.


by QTG on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 02:53:14 PM EST

Using Pro-life talking points (2.00 / 2)

I think where Obama has gone wrong these last few weeks is that he has been using Republican frames for a lot of issues.  Like this issue about late term abortions, which was such a brouhaha during the partial birth abortion fight.  The right wing held that the exception to the abortion ban should only be "the life of the Mother" not the health because they claimed that the term health was too broad a loophole that would lead to abortion on demand.

Obama just accepted that there was a loophole by discussing "mental distress, and "feeling blue".  I don't know if he deliberately did this or if he wasn't aware of the furious past battle over these terms.

There's an interesting article about this contraversy at Pandagon.net called  Don't reinforce the myth, which uncovers the truth behind the late term abortion myths.  An excerpt -

"Barack Obama has come out and opposed 3rd trimester abortions for "mental distress".  My initial thought was not to get too bunched up about it, because pandering actually ranks above food and water as necessities for a politician's continued existence, and this is a classic example of someone speaking out of both sides of his mouth.  Condemning late term abortions for "mental distress"---a term that conjures up images of women aborting at 7 months because their boyfriends left without a forwarding address, because they didn't realize that being pregnant meant you got fat, etc.---is like condemning purple stoplights.  It's great that you have that opinion and all, but you do know the thing that bothers you doesn't exist, right?  As Dr. B lays out, there's only two clinics in the entire country that do 3rd trimester abortions, and they have a long list of indicators you have to satisfy to get on the list, mostly direct threats to the mother's health or fetal abnormalities incompatible with life.  There are 3rd trimester abortions performed because of psychiatric indicators, but that's a much different thing than "mental distress".  At bare minimum, I'm guessing the women (or more likely girls in many cases) that have really late abortions because of mental distress have to have mental health problems so severe that they outstrip the trauma of having a 3rd trimester abortion, which is pretty serious in and of itself.  I don't think that it takes much work to imagine some of the horror stories that land women (or more commonly, girls) in Kansas or Colorado to get an abortion---being raped by relatives, suicide attempts, strenuous attempts at self-aborting that put them in danger of killing themselves.  Considering that Dr. George Tiller of Kansas has an extensive counseling program attached to his services, including support groups with other people who find themselves in the tragic situation of having to get later term abortions, I'm guessing that the mental status of his patients is well understood by the staff at the clinic."

When talking about late term abortions, it would be good for Obama to throw a light on the terrible real life situations of those few unfortunate women, rather than the pro-life myths created by the Rovian GOP machine.


by spoot on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 03:45:25 PM EST

Re: Using Pro-life talking points (none / 0)

Thank you very much for that perspective, spoot.
The words that Obama used in both his initial interview and his subsequent remarks to the press are indeed laden with a symbolism that does not sit well with those who have fought for the rights that women now enjoy. It takes enormous discipline to speak to the press about abortion or contraception in a way that moves the debate forward. Obama does not seem to have that discipline yet. If Obama genuinely wants to open a debate about the morality of abortion (and I would advise him to stay the hell away from the issue), then he needs a much better team guiding him and he needs to rethink his language (witness the reaction by the right wing to his "punished with a pregnancy" statement during the primaries). He cannot create consensus by riling both sides equally. And no, it is not treason to criticize him in this way, rather it is an attempt to forge a more effective campaign through debate within the Party.  There is more to a political campaign than bashing the opposition and voting for one's candidate. It's also important to try to influence the campaign of your own nominee so that it better reflects your beliefs. If this cannot happen before the convention, then when can it happen?
by Puffin on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 04:38:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Using Pro-life talking points (none / 0)

Thank you very much for that perspective, spoot.
The words that Obama used in both his initial interview and his subsequent remarks to the press are indeed laden with a symbolism that does not sit well with those who have fought for the rights that women now enjoy. It takes enormous discipline to speak to the press about abortion or contraception in a way that moves the debate forward. Obama does not seem to have that discipline yet. If Obama genuinely wants to open a debate about the morality of abortion (and I would advise him to stay the hell away from the issue), then he needs a much better team guiding him and he needs to rethink his language (witness the reaction by the right wing to his "punished with a pregnancy" statement during the primaries). He cannot create consensus by riling both sides equally. And no, it is not treason to criticize him in this way, rather it is an attempt to forge a more effective campaign through debate within the Party.  There is more to a political campaign than bashing the opposition and voting for one's candidate. It's also important to try to influence the campaign of your own nominee so that it better reflects your beliefs. If this cannot happen before the convention, then when can it happen?
by Puffin on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 04:38:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama latest words are still problematic... (none / 0)

Only if you love to dissect insects....


by Beren on Sun Jul 06, 2008 at 05:15:48 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.