"Safe, Legal, And Never"
Hillary Clinton's wise position on abortion, reported by William Saletan:
"With all of this talk about freedom as the defining goal of America, let's not forget the importance of the freedom of women to make the choices that are consistent with their faith and their sense of responsibility to their family and themselves."Note the concluding words: faith, responsibility, family. This is the other side of Clinton's message: against the ugliness of state control, she wants to raise the banner of morality as well as freedom. Pro-choicers have tried this for 40 years, but they always run into a fatal objection: Abortion is so ugly that nobody who supports it can look moral. To earn real credibility, they'd have to admit it's bad. They often walk up to that line, but they always blink.
Not this time. Abortion is "a sad, even tragic choice to many, many women," said Clinton. Then she went further: "There is no reason why government cannot do more to educate and inform and provide assistance so that the choice guaranteed under our constitution either does not ever have to be exercised or only in very rare circumstances."
Does not ever have to be exercised. I searched Google and Nexis for parts of that sentence tonight and got no hits. Is the press corps asleep? Hillary Clinton just endorsed a goal I've never heard a pro-choice leader endorse. Not safe, legal, and rare. Safe, legal, and never.
Once you embrace that truth—that the ideal number of abortions is zero—voters open their ears. They listen when you point out, as Clinton did, that the abortion rate fell drastically during her husband's presidency but has risen in more states than it has fallen under George W. Bush. I'm sure these trends have more to do with economics than morals, but that's the point. Once we agree that the goal is zero, we can stop asking which party yaps more about fighting abortion and start asking which party gets results.
Admit the goal is zero, and people will rethink birth control. "Seven percent of American women who do not use contraception account for 53 percent of all unintended pregnancies," Clinton said. That number drew gasps from her pro-choice audience. I bet if she translated it to abortions, it would knock folks in Ohio out of their chairs. How many abortions are you willing to endure for the sake of avoiding the word "condom"? Clinton says we can cut the abortion rate through sex education, money for family planning, and requiring health insurers to cover contraceptives. What's your plan? Ban abortion and monitor everyone's womb like Romania did? Or ban it and look the other way while the pregnancies go on and the quacks take over?
That argument will never work for the true believers. They don't really care about the reality, it's moral posturing and group identity that matter. And the methods suggested, education, etc, will just be seen as condoning abortion, the way the far right views sex education as condoning pre-marital sex.
I think it's better to stick to first principles, as in personal rights. Gay marriage, drugs and abortion should be legal because it's nobody's f*ing business.
But then I'm a libertarian, what do you expect?
Todd Fletcher at January 31, 2005 7:29 PM
That argument will never work for the true believers. They don't really care about the reality, it's moral posturing and group identity that matter. And the methods suggested, education, etc, will just be seen as condoning abortion, the way the far right views sex education as condoning pre-marital sex.
I think it's better to stick to first principles, as in personal rights. Gay marriage, drugs and abortion should be legal because it's nobody's f*ing business.
But then I'm a libertarian, what do you expect?
T at January 31, 2005 8:41 PM
"(abortion)has risen in more states than it has fallen under George W. Bush"
I wonder if this has to do with the ridiculous trend pushing teens to abstain from sex?
Sheryl at February 1, 2005 1:54 AM
Hillary's speech writer stole this idea directly from the Jesuits, who've claimed for years that abortion is chosen mostly by women with extremely limited financial and social resources. They too have pointed to the fact that abortion "has risen in more states than it has fallen under George W. Bush." Although the hippy priests are a little vague on the details, I think the general policy implications are that the elimination of abortion can be achieved through -- ta dah! -- increased cash assistance and job training! Food Stamps and WIC and Medicaid! There's nothing that good old-fashioned liberal social programs can't solve.
Lena is the dried-up afterbirth of Yoko Ono at February 1, 2005 6:49 AM
"Gay marriage, drugs and abortion should be legal because..."
There's nothing else to do on a Friday night.
Lena, Rocker Chick on the Road to Ruin at February 1, 2005 7:02 AM
I just love you, Lena!
Amy Alkon at February 1, 2005 7:06 AM
There may be merit in Hill's comments, but the fact is that she is merely pandering. Or, to be fair, this women is such an obvious political opportunist that it is extremely ill-advised to seriously consider anything she says. While the rest of her party continues its march to the left, and off the preverbial cliff, Hill has her eye on the ball - election 2008. She's already moving toward the center, because she knows that she'll stomp any and all comers in the primaries. Shrewd. Very shrewd.
As for the abortion deal, my own feeling is that it comes down to a property rights issue. Unless the fetus can live on its own without being physically connected to the mother (even if that includes living in the NICU), it belongs to mom, and she can do what she wants with it, just like she can give her kidney away or chop her arm off. It ain't pretty but it's consistent with our constitution. If you ever want to watch folks get steamed, have that conversation with a true believer:-)
EC
Chris Wilson at February 1, 2005 3:44 PM
What Chris said.
Besides, why this praise for a woman whose first defense for freedom of choice is language like, "...choices that are consistent with their faith."
Faith?! Say what! I thought this was a godless advice blog!
RKN at February 1, 2005 5:09 PM
Hey, Hill's acknowledgement of faith is part and parcel of the same political strategy - inch ever closer to the middle so that when the national election comes along, you can stake out any position you want. Kerry was focused on beating ultra-lefty Dean, so he stayed left throughout the primaries. Then, when he tried to make the shift to the middle, he got clobbered for inconsistencies. Hill, who is orders of magnitude more politically adept that Icabod Crane, will not make the same mistake. If that, you can be sure.
Notice there's no mention of core political philosophy or anything like that with this one. That's because there is none - she wants power. Period. Any position will do. And she scares the bejeezus out of me.
Chris Wilson at February 2, 2005 6:24 PM