As Long as the Democrats are the Party of Abortion, They Deserve to Lose

As Long as the Democrats are the Party of Abortion, They Deserve to Lose January 17, 2017

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by Daniel Lobo https://www.flickr.com/photos/daquellamanera/
Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by Daniel Lobo https://www.flickr.com/photos/daquellamanera/

Now for a little palate cleanser.

I wrote this before either of my latest posts about President Elect Trump. But, publishing being what it is, it showed up after they came out.

Whatever the order of their publication, I think the summation of all these posts is that I’m thoroughly disenchanted with both political parties.

I’ve talked about converting the Democratic Party before, and what I’ve said seems to fall on deaf ears. Most pro life people just don’t seem to hear me when I say it’s the only real political action we can take that will work to convert this culture.

On the other hand, whenever I criticize the Republicans for their crazy policies and behavior, some fool always pops up to tell me I am not pro life and am going straight to the infernal regions. That reached it’s peak a few months ago when I was told that I was not only not pro life, but not even a real Catholic. Why? Because I directly quoted then candidate Donald Trump and linked to several of his unquotable-because-it’s-too-vile comments.

This came from someone who has stood up with me at press conferences, fighting for pro life legislation. But … evidently party loyalty and Trump trump reason.

The truth is, neither of these political parties is worthy of holding power in this great nation. They are both corrupt. And neither one of them gives a care about you and me. The public reaction to the constant stonewalling and overall bad governance we have received at the hands of both parties played a huge part in the emotional meltdown that drove the Trump campaign.

I’ve reached a point where I despair that We the People will ever wake up. Our predilection for looking for someone on a white horse to save us from the exploitative practices of the Rs and the Ds has led us into following anyone who yells loudly enough and will say things we want to hear. We follow these demagogues, even when they are clearly amoral reprobates and compulsive liars.

Meanwhile, the Democrats continue down the road of same-old, same-old. They just won’t open the party up to pro life people. In fact, they do everything they can to drive us away.

Where will it end?

What do you think?

Here, from the National Catholic Register, is my discussion about the Democratic Party’s closed door policy against pro life Democrats.

Recently, Democrats for Life sent me an email asking for money to help a pro-life Democrat who was in a run-off in Louisiana for the United States Senate. I donated money to the guy. It wasn’t much money, but it represented my best wishes and fading hope that we can one day reclaim the Democratic Party for life.

I didn’t pay attention to what happened after that, so it was a while before I learned that the Democrat lost to the Republican in this race, and it was a while after that before I looked into it to see what happened. It turns out that the Democrats practically abandoned their own pro-life candidate — which is emblematic of why so many Christians turned out at the polls in November to vote for a presidential candidate whose moral life might have disqualified him in another era.

These Christians felt compelled to vote for what was essentially the lesser of two evils. The reason they ended up backing Donald Trump was that they honestly (and with good reason) felt that Hillary Clinton was bound to continue the invidious attacks on them and their ability to practice their faith without government harassment that was so aggressively promoted during the Obama administration.

The behavior of the national Democratic Party leadership in the election in Louisiana underscores and upholds that fear.

The United States Senate is almost at a tie, with the number tipping by what before the election was a slender balance of one or two votes in favor of the Republicans. What that means is that there is a lot of raw power swaying first one way and the next in every single electoral battle for every single seat in that legislative body.

The election in Louisiana did not stand to tip the balance decisively. It would, rather, have narrowed the margin to one vote, instead of two. The Democrats, if they had gone to bat for the pro-life Democrat on the ticket in Louisiana, had the chance to run up their total to 49 senators.

But winning that senate seat would not have helped them oppose defunding Planned Parenthood. If the Democrats had gained that Senate seat, they would not have gotten a vote to buttress their war on the unborn.

Rather, they would have gotten a vote to strengthen the war they should be fighting, which is for the safety of America in the face of legitimate concerns about treasonous activity. They would have gotten another vote to keep the social programs such as Social Security and Medicare together. They would have gotten another vote on committees and the floor in key situations involving the breadbasket issues that the party should be focused on.

But, sadly, the Democratic Party is not focused on those breadbasket issues. It has become an outpost for those who equate abortion with feminism and claim that legal abortion is all there is to women’s rights. It has also, due to the direction in which President Obama has taken the party, become the think tank and the political leadership for official, governmental attacks on religious freedom in general and the Catholic Church, in particular.

A pro-life Democrat, even in a closely-balanced United States Senate, was so unwelcome, so antithetical to the true focus of the leadership of this once great party, that they did not lift a finger to help one win this important election.

The Republicans plowed into that senate race intending to win it. They put their money and their mouths behind their candidate. The Ds, at least the Ds at the DNC, sat the thing out. (Read the rest here.)

 

 

 


Browse Our Archives

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment

50 responses to “As Long as the Democrats are the Party of Abortion, They Deserve to Lose”

  1. Concur, Rebecca. It’s a sad commentary, but you know, we both said this back in 2012 and even more sadly, nothing has changed. And that’s why we now have Trump. Not ideal, but then in a way, he’s neither D nor R. It’s an experiment assuredly, but something has to change.

  2. I’m sorry to be the bearer of sad tidings, but contrary to the propaganda Republicans have been spreading for the last 40 years, if you vote Republican you are voting pro-birth, not pro-life.

    As eloquently explained in Evangelium Vitae, by Pope Saint John Paul II, “pro-life” entails not just being opposed to abortion, but also being opposed to war, to the death penalty, and to social and economic injustice. It also requires supporting a vigorous social safety net, first class education programs, and an equitable distribution of income.

    If you were truly pro-life you would not only be a Democrat, but you would be in the Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren far-left wing of the party. Especially since we know that the most effective way, by far, to reduce the incidence of abortion is not to make it illegal (which, like the “war on drugs”, will simply create more criminals) but rather to provide comprehensive sex-education as well as reproductive health services.

  3. the curious fact is, however, that both the rate and number of abortions go down more during the years that there is a democrat president … if “pro-life” is a person’s raison d’etre shouldn’t that party be the one that is supported?

  4. “If you were truly pro-life you would not only be a Democrat, but you
    would be in the Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren far-left wing of the
    party.”

    Criticism of Republican policies might be justified but given Bernie’s pro-abortion stance, he is even farther from being pro-life.

  5. I am to the point that I equate feminism with abortion, and the 59 million souls sacrificed to “Choice” a genocide. Not to mention the millions of people thrown into poverty by the evil of divorce, the vulnerable children sacrificed to homosexual prostitution in the name of sexual liberty, and the destruction of the meritocracy by hiring people just because they are women while firing ” over represented minorities”, mainly white and asian males.

  6. Took the words right out of my mouth. They are against the very policies which reduce the abortion rate. They refuse to acknowledge that easy access to free/low cost contraception REDUCES the abortion rate, along with medically accurate sex education. They also refuse to support paid family leave, child care help and higher minimum wages.

  7. If I heard correctly on NPR, the abortion rate is at an all time low! So, birth control and hopefully education may be the reason. Hope this continues, but still support Roe V Wade in keeping the procedure legal and safe.

  8. There are two types of pro-life position. One favors the quantity of life while the other favors the quality of life.

  9. Even if one accepts your formulation about being “pro- birth”, how does being anti- birth make you pro- life?

  10. Well, the time of the Dems may be past. The unprecedented electoral losses of the past 8 years (1042 offices turned R) and the unwillingness of people to face the collapse don’t bode well for the future. Normally, I would shrug and talk about pendulum swings, but I read a lot of news and commentary that suggest a doubling down, not a serious study of losses.

    Keith Ellison for DNC chair? Really? His past ties to the Nation of Islam and defense of the anti- semetic Louis Farakhan should disqualify him immediately.

    Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are the public faces of the Democratic Party right now. Both are extreme advocates of what’s been killing the Dems for years. Cory Booker playing two-faced over Jeff Sessions was not a smart opening bid for his 2020 presidential run.

    I don’t gloat about this, but shake my head at the level of denial in play. One party rule is not healthy. The question at this point is where a serious opposition party will come from? I like the American Solidarity Party, but it will never be a mainstream party.

    And yes, I get your point about the pro-life issue, Rebecca. It seems to have become an obsession. Perhaps a fatal obsession.

  11. No, because they, despite all the lipservice to “safe, legal and rare”, they actually do not care to make them rare. If the number of abortions goes down under a Democrat president, it is merely accidental to their policies. They are not doing anything towards that goal. Numbers could go down even further, if the Democrat powers-that-be cared to do something on the legal sphere too.

  12. How so? The rate of abortions has declined to the lowest in history. We have had a Democrat in the White House for 8 years even though most of it was with a GOP congress.

  13. and yet, despite doing everything they can towards that goal … both the rate and number of abortions are higher during the years that there is a republican president

  14. “If I heard correctly on NPR, the rate of murder, rape and robbery is at an all time low!” Sorry, PS, I don’t think you get it. Try and understand that to us, abortion is always and everywhere a crime, and one of the vilest and most hideous. To make a compromise with it is to make a compromise with murder.

  15. The rate of Democrat votes has declined too. It is widely understood that dozens of state laws limiting abortion exist, so much that the Usual Suspects want to do the usual end run and get SCOTUS to forbid any activity against abortion whatsoever. If abortion has diminished, it is certainly due to the many little laws passed by its enemies and no thanks to all those who want to make access to it limitless.

  16. The number of abortions has surely declined because of the many abortion-limiting state laws passed by Republicans, which Democrats everywhere have opposed with the maximum ferocity. To make them responsible for the fall in numbers is like making Adolf Hitler responsible for an increase in bar mitzvahs.

  17. Don’t be ridiculous. You speak as though abortion, not birth, were the beginning of life.

  18. Ken, I’ve always appreciated your thoughtful and reasoned comments and am curious what you think Bernie is doing that represents an extreme part of the problem. Except for his pro choice views I thought he offered the best substance and ideas for our country. I’d love to consider if I’ve missed something. Thanks

  19. I get that the rate of abortions is down. If you noticed, I’m glad. However, that doesn’t mean the law making it legal should be done away with.

  20. IMO, it has diminished due to the use of birth control, which is now easier to handle with IUD’s, the Pill is still around, some can be given in shots that last a few months, as well as the all time favorite, condoms (which prevent STD’s) as well as prevent pregnancy. Hopefully some of it is due to sex education and perhaps some are not having sex as often. Access should still be legal for those that make that horrible decision, otherwise the return to illegal ones will return and also self induced ones—neither a good option for a desperate woman.

  21. Well, he is a socialist. More accurately, a social democrat. I think his devotion to government solutions is over drawn, although I am not against all government solutions. For example, he is for single payer. While that would be better than Obamacare, I don’t agree that is right for the U.S. More to the point, I don’t think the nation as a whole would accept it. Other ways of achieving universal healthcare (a moral imperitive) can be more efficient and politically acceptable.

    By the way, I didn’t agree with Bernie’s politics, but I found him authentic (as they say). But when I found out he owns three homes, I lost some respect. Who needs three homes, especially calling themselves a socialist?

  22. Don’t despair Rebecca. Politics will always break your heart, no matter what side you’re on. That’s because it’s a direct application of idealism against two realities: (1) that politics requires comprimise and (2) politicians are human beings proned to failure and sin. Just look around at the conservative and liberal people who comment. No one on either side is happy. It will always break your heart.

    I guess you’re not a baseball fan. Given that one’s team will unlikely win the world series at any given year, a fan gets used to having one’s heart broken. It happens in all sports acctually. Just this passed Sunday, the Dallas Cowboys (I’m a Cowboys fan) lost on a feild goal with three seconds left to the Greenbay Packers. With time running out the Packer’s quarterback made a huge, somewhat fortunate pass to a reciever who miraculously kept his feet in bounds to put them into that position to make the field goal. Now mind you, the Cowboys were the best team in the conference all year long, but the Packers got hot (and lucky) at the right time. One gets used to having their heart broken. 😉

    As you’ve said often, only Jesus makes one satisfied.

  23. and yet, despite doing everything they can towards that goal … both the rate and number of abortions are higher during the years that there is a republican president

  24. Well, we’ll see what happens now, shall we? In the meanwhile, allow me to compliment you on your faith – you believe the impossible.

  25. What law? A bunch of made-up reasons by judges determined to have a certain result no matter what is no more a law than I am Paul Newman.

  26. you seem unclear on the meaning of impossible … my comments contain actual verifiable facts

  27. Thanks much Ken. Btw I do feel most at home with the views of the American Solidarity Party.

  28. First of all,Rebecca, let me acknowledge my gratitude for having discovered your voice online. I’m an active Catholic, but also a political progressive (not a liberal) and I think the church’s true beliefs and teachings have been corrupted and co opted by political conservatives. I’m wondering if you can explain for me your quote below from National Catholic Register because I continue to hear about “government harrasment” by Democratic administrations from conservative Catholics. Can you explain to me how Catholics are harassed by the government?
    Here’s your quote:
    The reason they ended up backing Donald Trump was that they honestly (and with good reason) felt that Hillary Clinton was bound to continue the invidious attacks on them and their ability to practice their faith without government harassment that was so aggressively promoted during the Obama administration.

  29. When more people eat ice cream in New York, more people die in India. That is an actual verifiable fact also. There is a difference between correlation and causality.

  30. I know a number of adults who suffered through the misery of an unwanted childhood. It is not something I would recommend.

  31. No. I suggest you have a look at some images of what that “right” actually does. Right to murder is not a right.

  32. In that case, I have absolutely nothing to say to you. Anyone who can contemplate the bloody dismemberment of human flesh and regard it as her right to do so if she chooses cannot possibly understand anything I say.

  33. No, they’re not. The abortion rate has been steadily declining for 30 years. Yes, it went down a bit faster under Obama than it did Bush, but there can be many, many explanations for that. 9/11, tighter state laws, etc. etc.

    The goal of any pro-life person isn’t to reduce abortions – it is to eliminate them. If someone takes a school full of kids hostage and starts killing them one by one, should we be satisfied if a few of them manage to escape due to government negotiations?

  34. Proof? If that was the case, the abortion rate would have declined far more in the more restrictive states than others, but that’s not what happened.

  35. Dismembering is illegal. The pix shown (and no, I am not so cold as to be not affected by them…I do not seek them out) are those taken to do just what they do—discourage the procedure. I do not encourage abortions, but I can understand from conversations with those who have done so the reasons why they did so, rape and incest being a couple. Personally the first 3 months should be the time frame. However, it is not my job to tell another woman what to do with her body. This debate is ongoing. I wish that no woman will ever have to face that decision. We will not agree, and I understand that.

  36. you will never eliminate abortion by prohibition …. not now, not in the past, not ever.

    you will only minimize abortion through contraception, comprehensive sex education, universal health care and a social safety net … this is supported to a greater degree by the policies of the democrat party than the republican party

  37. We disagree. Certainly abortion will never end completely, but if it is illegal, that would cut it a lot more than government social policies. Contraception doesn’t minimize abortion at all. Contraception gives people a mentality that it’s reasonable to partake in irresponsible sex under the false premise that they will not get pregnant, and then abortion is a backup when contraception inevitably “fails”..

  38. Yes, because we all know that allowing drinking at all hours reduces drunkenness. In the world without shrimp, perhaps. As it happens I am against the “war on drugs” and would like to see most drugs legalized, but I am very clear that that would make the problem of addiction worse, not better.

  39. Who needs three homes, especially calling themselves a socialist?”

    Well, he’s a socialist, not a communist…

  40. Fallacy of the false dilemma. The majority of pro-life people are both. This false division between the two is just another one of the big lies.

  41. I generally really like NPR. It is my primary news source. But it has a *huge* blind spot when it comes to abortion.

    The *number* of abortions is at a low. But the abortion *rate* is still quite high. The number of abortions have been dropping, but so have the total number of pregnancies. Economic downturns tend to do that. But the percentage of those pregnancies that end in abortion is still high and has not really seen a corresponding drop. One dataset I saw actually showed an increased abortion rate in the last 10 years.