I'm really hoping that a woman's right to choose(I prefer this term to abortion)isn't politicized.  I fear that all this piecemeal legislation about notifications and permissions, forcing a woman to jump through one hoop after another to exercise her right to choose, doesn't essentially accomplish the same thing as overturning "Roe v. Wade".  Too, folks are often all too eager to control the discussion of a woman's right to choose by talking about adoption or prevention, which are fine to talk about and pursue but let's never lose site of the ball that is always so "up in the air"....the ability of the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade.  If that occurs, then women will again be subjugated to a situation they may not be prepared to handle and to a society that may not be able to help either the mother or the child.

 

"I'm really hoping that a woman's right to choose(I prefer this term to abortion)isn't politicized."

It's been politicized for years now.  As a "Gray Democrat" like Lowell's talking about, I am personally glad the Democratic Party is turning that way.  This "new Democratic Party" seems to be very big tent.  Of course, I'm sure it's only temporary.  After we've been in charge for a while, the liberals will take charge again and our "big tent" will start to shrink.  It happened to the GOP, it'll happen to us too.

In my opinion,your scenario is certainly possible, but there are other scenarios that could play out as well.  In the meantime, the Democratic Party is now THE centrist party in America.  It is also THE party that cares about people other than gazillionaires.

I wouldn't be too hasty celebrating this change.  A common belief is that Democrats and Republicans occupy the extremes on an issue, and good government/compromise is found in the middle.  Now, the extremes on our side is, we want to reduce abortions without banning them outright.  I hate to think where the middle ground between that and Dobson is.

Also, the Casey thing is another case of the media playing into Republican talking points.  Casey was barred from speaking at the 1992 convention, but not because he was anti-abortion.  He was barred because he refused to endorse Clinton.  I didn't see many people complaining that Zell Miller wasn't allowed to speak at the 2004 DNC convention.

makes a big deal out of something our Democratic leaders have been saying for years. Over the past, about 10 years, I have heard this talk from the Democratic Congress. The problem has been they could not get legislation like this introduced in a Republican Congress.
The Media has always played this issue against Democrats. With the Media there is only a Pro or an Anti, they have no concept of anything in between. Maybe they do, but creating a fight between both parties makes more news head lines. Just listen to CNN, MSNBC (I do not watch FOX), when ever they get Democrats on their show they always try to get them to say, what they want them to say, just to create a fight in Congress for news stories. Then the media claims they are only trying to get the story, but what appears on the news, the comments that create a fight.
Everything sounds fine except "Health Insurance Prenatal care", I am not sure they should or can get into the affairs of how insurance companies runs their business. Depending on how it is worded it may be shot down in court?

Most Democrats, I know, do not believe in abortions, but they truly believe in the "Right to Choice". Personally I am for the education, welfare and health care, parental care and all things that may prevent an abortion. My major concern is how much the Anti's get their language into the legislation.

It is totally a womans "RIGHT to CHOICE" or CHOOSE her own solutions to her life. That goes for teens 16 years or older. Before that age, someone needs to know how that teen got pregnant.

That's utterly ridiculous terminology, and I don't know why the MSM uses it (well, actually it's because they're trying way too hard to present "both sides," and if one is ANTI something than the other has to be PRO something).  The fact is, there's one side that's against legalized abortion and another side that is for abortions being safe and rare...but totally legal.  Then, there's the majority of Americans in the "gray" middle, who have a multitude of views on this subject.  Most people are not fanatics about the issue, although obviously there are a few on both sides.

Thanks Lowell.
You say that "The fact is, there's one side that's against legalized abortion and another side that is for abortions being safe and rare...but totally legal.  Then, there's the majority of Americans in the 'gray' middle."

Most surveys show that "safe, rare, and legal" IS the grey middle that includes not only the majority of Americans but the majority of people around the world. I personally know some people who fight for this idea who say they could never personally consider having an abortion, even if their own life were at stake.

No one is for abortion, as you point out, just as no one who is "for adoption" is advocating getting pregnant only so that another couple who wants to adopt can take it away from the birth parents. No one who is "for stem cell research" advocates getting pregnant only so stem cells can be created.

Finding a middle ground, and one that prevents the problem, should not be seen as any kind of backpeddling.  I'm not surprised the conservative media presents it this way. I applaud the Dems for not using someone's personal plight as an opportunistic wedge issue to get someone to write a check on one side of the issue or another.

Don't forget it's not just a woman's right to chose. Everyone has a right to medical privacy and bodily integrity, male or female, married or single. Even female patients. Even pregnant female patients. The right to make decisions about pregnancy derives from that.  It's not limited to that. In fact, when the case was argued before the Supreme Court, and the state attorney was asked to define where the right ended, he said he didn't know.  He urged to court just "to pull this loose thread." The attorney for the patients said "when I pull a loose thread, my sleeve falls off."

Being another woman on this thread, I really appreciate your comments.  Nothing against you guys..... 

Pregnancy prevention coupled with the woman's right to make choices about her life is a win-win!

The political tactics of winning a race or a majority shouldn't ever trespass on a man or a woman's right to make decisions about their bodies!

Go Webb!!!!!

that the right to control your own body is the difference between being slave and being free. This goes for pregnancy and at the end of your life (think Terri Schiavo).

The anti-abortion opposition here is intent on controlling women, not really on supporting a culture of life. And that means they consider women to be second class citizens. Don't foret that the Southern Baptists just removed a female professor from one of their seminaries because women should never teach men about gospel.