Only one does not vote for a party. One votes for an individual who subscribes to all or part of the platform (if there is one) and has good chance or no chance of effectively legislating to affect the platform.
I agree. One also needs to realize that politician who goes against party platform that the majority of the party agree with has small chance of causing change.
What should we say, abortion no so bad, okay to vote democrat? Wrong.
not sure what mess you mean.
We should look at the candidates and evaluate everything.
Rioting in the streets, armed militia shooting people in the streets, people dying from a pandemic virus.
Where are your statistics supporting that judgement? And what exactly do you mean by “major”? Will it end 50% of the abortions? Probably not. But then repealing Roe v. Wade probably won’t end very many abortions either. So there is that.
And a substantial number of them are not.
That is a problem. But I have seen no legislative proposal that addresses that problem either.
I do think there should be more in the way of education along with the legislative efforts, but there were way fewer abortions than NARAL claimed before legalization, so I think prohibitions would probably work better than you think.
I can only imagine what would happen should a Republican propose legislation against pre- and extra-marital sex!
I agree abortion has stayed legal through these years, though there have been Republicans who have banned some abortions while Democrats have pushed harder for more freedom.
I pray this is true. Hopefully there is a new sexual revolution happening that wipes out the previous one.
This is the result of the pro-life movement and the opening of pro life women’s care centers set up near abortion clinics and the result of many, many prayers from many many people and some Republican politicians
As a Catholic I can not support this nor support government officials forcing Catholics to provide contraceptives for their employees
Then how do you explain the steadily decreasing number of abortions after peaking in 1981, despite the fact that abortion remains legal? We are actually at pre-1973 levels right now.
…which makes the point that such legislation would not be a feasible solution. On the other hand, making childbirth a guaranteed service for all is a feasible solution. Some other nations have done it.
The availability and the increase of contraceptives, morning after pills and the AIDs epidemic that started around 1981, that brought about the encouragement of protection during sex.
Or maybe people are educated about safe sex, don’t feel pressured to procreate.
Yes, I did mention in my post the AIDS epidemic bringing about the use of protection or “safe sex” and the availability of contraception.
That would be a good program provided it worked on the principle of subsidiarity. Not go right to the feds to get it through.
But, abortion keep going down. Not matter who is in the White House.
I wouldn’t say it if it wasn’t true.
No, sorry. It’s the result of state legislators (for the most part) and some local governments enacting laws that restrict abortion, either through regulations on the clinics themselves or the doctors performing abortions.
You don’t have to support it, just acknowledge that it’s true. Effective, widely-available brith control reduces the need for abortions.
Don’t believe everything you read on the internet, though as I said I hope it is true and that it is for good moral reasons.
To a point yes, legislators have helped but those laws come due to the push and encouragement of the pro life movement educating people on the horror of what happens during an abortion. Education helps. In my city the abortion mill closed because abortions decreased due to the women’s care center opening up next door providing sonograms, care, support and education…
Oh I agree it’s true. Mentioned it in a post myself.
Except that some birth control is abortifacient.
No we are discussing if one can be Catholic and vote Democrat. There is much more the Democratic party has that goes against Catholic teaching than just abortion.
First they will change minds and hearts to reject abortion as a choice. Then making it illegal will be much easier.
It’s well known, and has been for years. Documented in many polls.
Since the Republicans don’t have a platform, and only go along with the Trumpists, theres a lot there to give a Catholic pause, too
The church does not advocate voting for someone solely on the basis of his stance on abortion, but this is because there could be other disqualifying concerns. Not, however, because other issues rise to comparable importance.
State legislators do play a significant role, but they can only act within the limits of federal law, and federal law is bounded by Supreme Court decisions (Roe, Casey…). The only way to finally address abortion and make it illegal is if those decisions are reversed, and the only way to do that is if the makeup of the court is sufficiently changed. And the only one who can do that is the president. Justice Ginsburg will almost surely leave the court and be replaced by the next president. Let’s not pretend that this does not represent a deadly threat to abortion “rights” - depending on which president nominates her replacement.
Have you heard of a legal theory that would enable Roe to be overturned? I have not.
As I’ve said here before, I believe that the Court should not be packed by Justices of one political persuasion. The Court should hold opposing views in tension and the right answer to a question should bubble up based on sound jurisprudence.
Nor does the church advocate not voting for someone soley on the basis of his stance on abortion.
That is one way, but not the only way. Another way is to convince women to chose life willingly. Threatening to throw them in jail is not the only way to do that, are arguable not even the best way. However if enough women are convinced to chose life willingly, it will be much easier to make it illegal and force the last remaining holdouts to comply. But when the number of holdouts is a large as it is now, some work on hearts and minds needs to happen first, or else it will be something like the alcohol prohibition era.
Improved and increased availability of ABC, and lately, young people… having less sex.
My point was that we already have this pretty widely, but people are still having abortions. Look at England: all free health care and they still have a high rate.