"Why I'm a Pro-Life Liberal"

[emilynghiem]

Why I'm a pro-life liberal - The Week

The pro-life leftist position maintains that human life is so significant, so inherently valuable, so irreplaceable that it should be the central subject of political concern. This view requires, therefore, that since we care enough about the outcome of pregnancy to insist against abortion, then we must continue to care about the outcome when abortion is no longer a legal option. To me, this requires a culture agreeing to put its money where its mouth is — that is, to provide robust support programs that render feasible the entire process of childbearing and childbirth, from pregnancy to child care to the total span of family life. Programs that immediately come to mind include universal health care, which would obviate the incredible expenses of pregnancy, often costing in the thousands of dollars out of pocket; government-supported parental leave and policies protecting the employment of mothers; and a no-strings-attached child allowance.

A 2013 study featured in the journal BMC Women's Health found that financial reasons were the primary motive for 40 percent of women who sought abortions. In fact, financial concerns were the "most frequently mentioned theme" in women's explanations of why they needed an abortion. Other concerns included a lack of insurance, a lack of adequate housing, and a lack of stable living conditions. The study's authors note that for women seeking abortion, the decision is rarely simple; most women expressed multiple reasons that in culmination led them to believe they could not become mothers, and financial reasons were frequently at the core of those stacked concerns.

What people who are genuinely interested in reducing abortion need to understand is that all of these factors are mutable. As a society, we are capable of seriously impacting the child poverty rate with transfer programs, as Matt Bruenig (full disclosure: he's my fiancé) has demonstrated at Demos by illustrating how state-funded support programs account for different countries' child poverty rates. As Bruenig shows, there is nothing especially mysterious about Finland, Sweden, or Norway that allows them to have such low child poverty rates — they merely choose, politically, to funnel their resources into preventing economic stress on parents and children. Accordingly, it's frequently the case that countries similar to the U.S. but with more robust social programs have lower rates of abortion: There are about 20 abortions per 1,000 women in the U.S., 7.8 per 1,000 in Germany, 14.3 in Denmark, and 11.1 in Finland. The needle, it appears, can be nudged.

In my view, a genuine pro-life political position takes its commitment to human life seriously, and is therefore willing to commit to supporting the lives of mothers and children rather than simply their births. I do not believe harsh punishment is the way to address the challenges facing mothers and infants that tragically conclude, at times, in abortion. Yet penalty seems to be the one way those operating under the "pro-life" banner feel comfortable expressing their commitment to life, which is why I find the usual right-wing anti-abortion approach underwhelming and incomplete. Compassion isn't cheap, and it's defined by its longevity: If we are to take seriously a cultural commitment to life, which I believe we should, then we'll conduct ourselves with mercy and sensitivity to the difficulties that bring women to choose abortion, and will commit ourselves to concrete political change aimed at reducing those struggles.

NOTE: Personally, I believe a lot more people are some degree of prolife in terms of not wanting abortion
and prochoice in terms of not wanting government to criminalize women for abortion. As a Constitutionalist, I interpret "prochoice" more broadly
to defend prochoice and prolife beliefs equally AS CHOICES or BELIEFS protected equally under law.
I believe laws should be written better in order to pass by consensus to guarantee objections and conflicts are resolved
and to prevent a bias either way from imposing on people with dissenting beliefs or information otherwise left out.

I believe prochoice and prolife sides would agree on laws that put more focus on holding men and women "equally responsible" for abstaining from sex that leads to unwanted pregnancy (especially holding men responsible for rape, incest, and other abuses that are not the fault of the victims), rather than focus on abortion regulations "after the fact" that inherently affect women more than men.

I THOUGHT the prochoice position sought to allow both views to be exercised equally.

But after ACA was passed, and fellow liberals, Democrats and prochoice advocates remained silent,
justified depriving others of the "free choice of health care' without federal mandates, and
even denounced, attacked and invalidated the beliefs and arguments of others based on free choice,

I was shocked to find there was BLATANT discrimination against political beliefs: where prochoice
only applies to people who "believe in abortion" as an unregulated unpenalized choice,
while those who "believe in free market health care" are subject to penalties by govt if they don't comply with insurance mandates.

How insurance mandates became fair game to penalize by law
to restrict "free choice" of health care (including charity care which does not count as an exemption from fines)
while REFUSING to permit any such proposed regulation and penalty on abortion
is beyond me.

I am still prochoice and am shocked to find how many prochoice
Democrats are willing to compromise free choice for political agenda.

 

[Mac1958]

.

There seem to be quite a few pro-life liberals.

I can think of one poster here who claims to be a conservative, but the only conservative issue he ever seems to defend is pro-life. On pretty much every other issue, he attacks conservatives.

I suspect he would be an example of a pro-life liberal.

.

 

[Kosh]

There are many that are "pro" life and not against abortion, it was the far left that claimed that if you are "pro" life that you are "anti" abortion.

 

[R.D.]

Why I'm a pro-life liberal - The Week

The pro-life leftist position maintains that human life is so significant, so inherently valuable, so irreplaceable that it should be the central subject of political concern. This view requires, therefore, that since we care enough about the outcome of pregnancy to insist against abortion, then we must continue to care about the outcome when abortion is no longer a legal option. To me, this requires a culture agreeing to put its money where its mouth is — that is, to provide robust support programs that render feasible the entire process of childbearing and childbirth, from pregnancy to child care to the total span of family life. Programs that immediately come to mind include universal health care, which would obviate the incredible expenses of pregnancy, often costing in the thousands of dollars out of pocket; government-supported parental leave and policies protecting the employment of mothers; and a no-strings-attached child allowance.

A 2013 study featured in the journal BMC Women's Health found that financial reasons were the primary motive for 40 percent of women who sought abortions. In fact, financial concerns were the "most frequently mentioned theme" in women's explanations of why they needed an abortion. Other concerns included a lack of insurance, a lack of adequate housing, and a lack of stable living conditions. The study's authors note that for women seeking abortion, the decision is rarely simple; most women expressed multiple reasons that in culmination led them to believe they could not become mothers, and financial reasons were frequently at the core of those stacked concerns.

What people who are genuinely interested in reducing abortion need to understand is that all of these factors are mutable. As a society, we are capable of seriously impacting the child poverty rate with transfer programs, as Matt Bruenig (full disclosure: he's my fiancé) has demonstrated at Demos by illustrating how state-funded support programs account for different countries' child poverty rates. As Bruenig shows, there is nothing especially mysterious about Finland, Sweden, or Norway that allows them to have such low child poverty rates — they merely choose, politically, to funnel their resources into preventing economic stress on parents and children. Accordingly, it's frequently the case that countries similar to the U.S. but with more robust social programs have lower rates of abortion: There are about 20 abortions per 1,000 women in the U.S., 7.8 per 1,000 in Germany, 14.3 in Denmark, and 11.1 in Finland. The needle, it appears, can be nudged.

In my view, a genuine pro-life political position takes its commitment to human life seriously, and is therefore willing to commit to supporting the lives of mothers and children rather than simply their births. I do not believe harsh punishment is the way to address the challenges facing mothers and infants that tragically conclude, at times, in abortion. Yet penalty seems to be the one way those operating under the "pro-life" banner feel comfortable expressing their commitment to life, which is why I find the usual right-wing anti-abortion approach underwhelming and incomplete. Compassion isn't cheap, and it's defined by its longevity: If we are to take seriously a cultural commitment to life, which I believe we should, then we'll conduct ourselves with mercy and sensitivity to the difficulties that bring women to choose abortion, and will commit ourselves to concrete political change aimed at reducing those struggles.

NOTE: Personally, I believe a lot more people are some degree of prolife in terms of not wanting abortion
and prochoice in terms of not wanting government to criminalize women for abortion. As a Constitutionalist, I interpret "prochoice" more broadly
to defend prochoice and prolife beliefs equally AS CHOICES or BELIEFS protected equally under law.
I believe laws should be written better in order to pass by consensus to guarantee objections and conflicts are resolved
and to prevent a bias either way from imposing on people with dissenting beliefs or information otherwise left out.

I believe prochoice and prolife sides would agree on laws that put more focus on holding men and women "equally responsible" for abstaining from sex that leads to unwanted pregnancy (especially holding men responsible for rape, incest, and other abuses that are not the fault of the victims), rather than focus on abortion regulations "after the fact" that inherently affect women more than men.

I THOUGHT the prochoice position sought to allow both views to be exercised equally.

But after ACA was passed, and fellow liberals, Democrats and prochoice advocates remained silent,
justified depriving others of the "free choice of health care' without federal mandates, and
even denounced, attacked and invalidated the beliefs and arguments of others based on free choice,

I was shocked to find there was BLATANT discrimination against political beliefs: where prochoice
only applies to people who "believe in abortion" as an unregulated unpenalized choice,
while those who "believe in free market health care" are subject to penalties by govt if they don't comply with insurance mandates.

How insurance mandates became fair game to penalize by law
to restrict "free choice" of health care (including charity care which does not count as an exemption from fines)
while REFUSING to permit any such proposed regulation and penalty on abortion
is beyond me.

I am still prochoice and am shocked to find how many prochoice
Democrats are willing to compromise free choice for political agenda.

I'm not

 

[DriftingSand]

Leftists with a conscience will be pro-life. PERIOD! Nobody in a state of sound mind and body could conceive of ripping a fetus limb from limb or burning it to death with saline. One MUST be a monster to perform such a horrifying procedure. One must be a demon to consider it an acceptable practice.

 

[nodoginnafight]

There are many that are "pro" life and not against abortion, it was the far left that claimed that if you are "pro" life that you are "anti" abortion.

I'm pro-life and anti-abortion - except for rape and health of the mother