Will the Real Pro-life Party Please Stand Up?
Joel Hunter is a conservative, Republican megachurch pastor in Central Florida. He's giving the Democrats some free advice, if they care to hear it: Even if you stick with Roe V. Wade, you can show evangelicals that you are the pro-life party by showing us how you will actually reduce abortions--and how you will support "life" in other areas besides abortion. From Steve Waldman's Beliefnet column today:
Hunter makes a practical argument: providing women with economic help in carrying babies to term can actually reduce the number of abortions more, and more quickly, than focusing on overturning Roe v. Wade. "With eight years of Bush the abortion rates have not declined. Every indication is that with financial support and different forms of supporting pregnant mother and then some post birth help also we could come close to 50% reduction in abortions. That's huge. That's huge."
Continuing with the same culture war paradigm is therefore morally dubious. "If we insist on keeping this an ideological war we're literally not saving the babies we could save. The Democrats have a huge opportunity here to really steal the thunder from those who are seen as traditionally pro life."
Keep a look out for other Christian leaders popping up with the same message. What's causing this is the failure of the Republicans to significantly reduce abortions, even with 20 years of Republican presidency since the rise of the Christian right. Many Christians are finally getting fed up.
In my opinion, the Republican line on abortion--the singular focus on banning it--was just a cynical ploy. I know that many GOP leaders were sincere, but overall the strategy was simply to oppose abortion symbolically while doing nothing to reduce abortions in real life. Moreover, there is evidence from history and from around the world that banning abortion would not even reduce abortions (have we ever banned anything successfully?).
Pro-life Christians are finally getting this. If the Democrats take Joel Hunter's advice, and stand up as the real "pro-life party," they will not find formerly Republican Christians falling into lock step with them. Many of these Christians are so burned by their experience with the GOP that they will not join another party. However, in their pro-life calculations at the voting booth, many will choose the Democrat.
But how many? That depends on Obama, and if he will take Joel Hunter's advice. If Obama can boldly articulate a pro-life platform to reduce abortion, care for children and families, reduce arms and prevent war then he could bring about a seismic shift in electoral politics that makes the "Reagan Democrat" phenomenon look like nothing.
For many pro-choice advocates, that will feel like a concession. But has the status quo stand off worked any better for them over the past few decades? Abortion is still legal, but access to safe abortions for women who choose them has all but disappeared for many working class and rural women--right alongside other medical and social services. For sure, embracing a politics of "life" is a risk for pro-choice advocates. But Christian leaders who reject the status quo are taken an arguably greater risk: with their own congregations, with their national reputations and with anti-abortion extremists.
Only one thing is certain: It's going to be fascinating to watch how change and risk will be embraced or rejected by various advocates on both sides of the debate through this election and an Obama presidency.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I am dead-set against pandering to pro-lifers. These people devalue women, and are very often the same religious fanatics that repulse me so much about the Republican party. No good can be served by courting them.
Please, Obama-- do not. The religious fundamentalists are the poison in US politics.
You seem to be stereotyping pro-lifers. I do not believe that EVERYONE that disapproves of abortion are ideologues that only want to ban all abortions and contraception and live in some 1950's TV show. Nor do I think ALL of them are christian fundementalists.
Some truely want to lower the abortion rate and see the need to support women who are pregnant or are single mothers. These are the people we need to reach out to. I approve of all three of those ideas myself and I'm a big ole Liberal. One can be pro-choice and want to lower the demand for abortions just like one can be pro-life and want to do the same thing.
Abortion as a black/white, Right/Left , Good/Evil positional litmus test hasn't gotten us anywhere over the past 30 years. Why not try something different?
I think we should all try to find areas in which we can agree, or at least agree to work together, including on the issue of abortions.
The right to an early term abortion has been a god-send to many young women. I believe that fervently. Having said that, I would like to see 1.) fewer women become pregnant who do not want to be pregnant, 2.) an end to late term abortions, and 3.) better support for all people, in all walks of life, women and men both, including in the areas of healthcare, education, jobs, and retirement.
Imagine when you are told at 7 months into your pregnancy that your baby has no brain and will die at birth. Imagine how you would feel not having a choice of whether to carry this baby to term or ending your pregnancy. While these cases are rare - they do happen. A total ban on late term pregnancies will eliminate that woman's choice. It would be interesting to know exactly how many pregnancies are ended late term for reasons other than situations like the above. Has a study ever been done?
It does not take a rocket scientist to understand the best way to stop abortions is to stop people from getting pregnant in the first place. I am not talking this worthless lecturing about abstinence, but education about birth control, laws that make access to such contraceptives easy and inexpensive, parents paying attention to what their children are actually doing, and education for students about sex and parenthood responsibilities. When these programs in schools were cut at the throat by these religious zealots and the government cut funding, the teenage pregnancy rate began to rise, and continues to do so, while when sex education (real science, not abstinence only) was taught, and birth control as well as STDs, AIDS, and parenting responsibilities were taught, the birth rate (and the abortion rate) dropped. It does not take a genius to figure out the correlation - just common sense and a brain that has not been poisoned by puritanical fanatics who have no clue about anything except making women nothing more than baby factories so they can claim that they are doing the Creator's work as a man.
Get a clue, folks, stopping pregnancies with proper education and proper supervision is the key to stopping abortions. Wake up, and start facing reality - sex is normal and unless you act responsibly because you have the information to make informed choices, you are always going to have unwanted pregnancies and abortions. They go hand-in-hand.
As the resources of this country (and the world) continue to diminsh and the population continues to rise, something must be done to decrease the population, whether it is abortion, sterilization or wide-spread, mandatory birth control. It may not be right, it may not be kind, but it will be necessary. Do the math.
The 1980's called; they want their fear-mongering rhetoric back.
I guess this also applies to the rantings of the 1960's, 1970's, and 1980's about where our dependence on fossil fuels, in general, and imported oil, in particular, is going to lead us. The only thing new is the history you do not know.
Ramal is dead on correct.
The operative word here is "dead" because if breeding and overpopulation aren't curtailed, there will be serious consequences.
To dismiss this as fear mongering shows your inability to understand the seriousness of the issue.
The year 2160 called it. It begs you to step ahead and see exactly the prophecy I speak about.
What Roe V wade is really about is the fact that the government wants to control womens bodies. It is not about saving babies. the repugs want the right to tell a women what to do with her body, pretty funny for a group that claims they want the peolple to govern themselves except for women having control of their own body of course. The scary thing is if you give them control that means they can control anything about your body that they want. How long do you think it would take for this government to decide we our overpopulated and demand that we have abortions China Anyone???? or how about they decide that its too expensive to take care of children with special needs????? don't think that could happen I'm not so sure. Might not be in our life time but what about 100 ur 200 years from now.. If you give them control over your bodies it won't be as far off as you think THINK ABOUT IT!!!!! I fwe have learned anything From the Bush reign the government can pretty much do what they want sho is going to stop them not the congress, not the people we all just go along with them like a bunch of drone's hey if it doesn't concern me shat do I care. We better be careful Or are children and grandchildren are in big trouble.
Ha Ha Ha. Obama with all his dubious affiliations, associations and friends does not belong in the WH. This and millions of other dems will remember in December. Democrat for McCain. I personally am pro choice, but believe late term abortion should be ILLEGAL.
The Keating Five is not a dubious relation?
Not to mention the 73 lobbyists and paid foreign agents on McClone's payroll directing him to do whatever they tell him to do.
If people like you truly believed the crap you spout you wouldn't bother wasting your time here. Obviously you are trying to convince yourself of what you speak. So sad for you!
So you feel that there should NEVER be an exception for a late term abortion ban???
Abortion is the SINGLE only right that the left wants Americns to have. They want the Government to have everybodys money and then redistribute as the omnipotent democrats feel it should be distributed to best gain votes.
They only bring up abortion to scare young uneducated women into believing that the right to have one will suddenly end. They know that abortions are and will remain legal but it is their politics of fear issue.
The Primary race proved that the left is way more concerned about the rights of BLACK MALES than they are concerned about the rights of WOMEN.
You seem to think the average person can tell the difference between the government taking all their money for taxes and the rich taking all their money and just keeping it.
What planet are you on? Its the right that keeps bringing up abortion and their promise to put an end to it being legal.
Good points. After 20 plus years you'd think the single issue voters would realize that the Republicans are never going to overturn Roe v Wade. It guarantees them the votes they need and that is so unbelievably shameful abuse of their supporters trust. How long will they keep falling for it? I hope people have caught on.
chronic5: I couldn't agree with you more, THAT'S THE ISSUE< THAT GET'S THEM ELECTED, THEY DON'T WANT TO GET RID OF IT
Having a pro-life political platform is meaningless. Declaring a war on abortions is like declaring a war on drugs or terror or hate. They are doomed to fail. The only way to decrease the number of abortions is to decrease the number of unwanted pregnancies. And, that can only be accomplished by improving the education of our children and by increasing the availability of contraceptive measures. Abortions should never be criminalized, because the rich will always have access to them, and the poor will die at the hands of untrained abortionist. Abortion is not a birth-control method and is not a trivial matter. It should only be performed during the first trimester, by a trained OB-GYN specialist and in a hospital setting capable of addressing the complications that sometimes will arise. And this should only happen after a panel of three or more professionals agree that in each case is the best option. The panel should consist of a spiritual guide, a social worker, a psychologist and a doctor. Abortion is wrong, but criminalizing it is worse. Abortions will be performed, whether is legal or not; let's make them legal and safe for women.
Well said! It is too bad more people cannot use logic rather than emotion.
I can remember the back-ally abortions and the terrible outcomes for many women that did not have money to buy safe abortion.
Reagan and Bush did not keep their campaign pledge for a constitutional amendment. McCain will also not be successful.
Oh and we should also bring back the inquisition, and try heretics in the supreme court. Keep your comforting myths away from medical clinics.
How can you post this in response to that comment? This is a BIG part of the problem with the "dialogue" today - extremist, lunatic, knee jerk reactions.
This guy says "lets make abortion safe and legal" and suggests some limits (which by the way, Europe imposes - they think our abortion policies are barbaric), and rather than countering with "well I think we need more relaxed limits in these areas because of XY and Z", you start ranting and raving about the INQUISITION and go to an insane place of trying heretics in the Supreme Court.
I increasingly see NO difference between RIGHT WING lunatics and LEFT WING lunatics. You're ALL lunatics. As someone who is probably left of the guy you're replying to, I thin he and I would still come to an agreement on most issues.
Unfortunately, folks like you and the real hardcore counterparts of yours on the opposite side of the ideological spectrum have no interest in solutions and only want to continue fostering hate and hurling invectives.
How is it that the pro-life party is also pro-war? Today's largest evangelical churches
are run by hypocrites and money hungry preachers who rationalize greed as goodly
and materialism as worthiness. Where is the Christianity in saving fetuses to have
them grow up in poverty and sent off to fight foreign wars as agents of corporatism?
They are only pro-life up until the moment of birth, then you are on your own.
The Christians took the Devil at his word. The Republicans would never take legitimate steps to reduce abortions. It is a key campaign issue and they need it to remain an issue.
What is surprising is that it took so long for the Christian Right to figure this out, that and to recognize that the anti-welfare state position of the hard right is fundamentally juxtaposed to humane and constitutional alternatives to abortion. Witness that the Welfare reform of the Clinton administration actually increased the abortion rate. Some say it tripled.
Now if the Republicans have been lying to you about their true agenda on abortion, what other things that you trust them to do are they unwilling to do in order to keep politcal power?
Pro-life = pro religious dogma without regard to born people and their grandchildren.
Not true... When will people like you learn to adopt NUANCED thought and stop with the ALL or nothing BS?
Im pro-choice and an atheist, but I agree that unrestrained abortion is not good for society. Europe puts limits.
Being pro-life in the sense this article means would be a GREAT thing and would be the CORRECT thing for a healthy society.
Its amazing how both the extreme left and the extreme right seem to just be driven by bitter and angry misanthropy more than anything else. It doesnt matter what the issue or what the proposed solution, all that matters is demonizing the "other guy"
You're right, unlimited access to abortions on the public dollar would be horrible. Of course, on the left hand we are talking about making them legal, but limiting the NEED for them, and on the right hand they are talking about making them completely illegal in ALL cases.... So yeah, I think that a little rabble rousing is in order!
The only way to get rid of Roe V Wade is to get more conservative judges on the Supreme Court.
Looks like that will probably not happen now so you liberals can have all the abortions you want.
Obama is certainly pro abortion.
I can't believe mike wrote:
"so you liberals can have all the abortions you want"
Who REALLY wants an abortion? Allowing safe and legal abortions available isn't the same as "wanting abortions to take place." It's providing an option in situations that we don't know abything about. The line of thinking that supposes people are encouraging abortion is ridiculous. .
People love to divorce pregnancy from it's sometimes complicated circumstances. We don't know the situation leading up to every pregnancy. How about ALL those sexual assaults that are taking place against our female soldiers? Most aren't even able to report their rapist without reprisals. The same situation applies to victims of incest. They are afraid to send a family member to jail.
...but that doesn't have anything to do with THIS article.
How about we find ways to reduce unwanted pregnancy to begin with? What's wrong with providing resources for families?
Good this is how things should be, enough of the insecure republican sabre rattling already.
This old, tired person and his old, tired rhetoric is why I don't even listen to the pro-strifers' so-called arguments anymore. I am so burned out by their bs that my ears literally close when I hear all their bleeding-heart crap about how every cell is sacred.
I'm over it and have totally written off any politician who preaches in their language. It's just plain crap that any politician should carry themselves as if they are some kind of morally superior being because of what they shout in public--which is more often than not a no-match for what they've actually done in private.
Don't like abortion? Don't have one. Or get a vasectomy. Need to fixate on women's privates some more? RENT A PORN.
Surely you're not suggesting that only liberals have abortions!?
No, Obama is NOT pro-abortion. Obama simply recognizes that his wife and daughters are PEOPLE, who should have the right to make choices about their own body!
Also, liberals are actually having FEWER abortions than conservatives, since they are the ones MORE likely to be using BC....
And finally, yeah, you're right, there aren't going to be more than 4 conservative judges on the SCOTUS, since that would mean that McCain would stand a chance!!
Here's my thought on this issue as a 58-yr-old woman who was young during the 60's-70's and remembers when an abortion was only safely available to those with plenty of money. At that time it was referred to as having a D& C because someone was "bleeding too much"--a pleasant euphemism for an abortion. This issue is not about fetuses or "babies". If it were, then every devout evangelical would be standing in line to adopt the unwanted children in our society. This issue is about whether a woman or the state owns a woman's body and her reproductive freedom. The overwhelming majority of Americans do not want the overthrow of Roe vs. Wade. My suggestion is this. If you truly believe that abortion is wrong, then step up to the plate and take out billboards across this country promising every woman who is considering an abortion that your organization, church, whatever will provide pre-natal care and delivery of her unplanned child and offer to adopt that child when it arrives in this world, without exception. When that happens then I'll begin to believe that this segment of the population is truly "pro-life". Until this happens I would agree with the poster who advocated sex education, birth control and the European approach which is obviously working better than the American one.
Well said. Best description of what "pro-life" should mean that I've seen.
Zack -- Thank YOU for having the courage to bring this topic up, on HuffPo.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
