The Rise of Pro-Life Liberals: Why the abortion debate is about to change
Doug Curran
Issue date: 2/1/05 Section: News
- Page 1 of 1
|
No longer are individuals who are in general agreement with the ideals of the Democratic Party, but who are also strongly pro-life, reluctant to define themselves as Democrats. And, while the change in the establishment is less rapid, many in the party leadership are beginning to welcome pro-life democrats into the ranks. This shift can also be seen in other traditionally pro-choice liberal domains, as evidenced by the enormous recent success of Feminists for Life. This movement, while not new, is beginning to gather momentum that it has not previously enjoyed. The implications are far- reaching, indeed.
The Beginnings of a Movement
Many recent studies have shown that the current young adult demographic is more pro-life than past generations - a reality due in part to advances in medical technology. "As technology like the ultrasound has progressed," Georgetown Right to Life president Becca Danis (SFS '06) explains, "people are better able to understand the true human nature of the unborn child."
Because of this and other factors, young people are simply more conservative when it comes to abortion-rights issues than they have been in the past. Many of these young people, however, take decidedly liberal stances when it comes to issues such as gay marriage and social justice, creating an apparent contradiction. Are they political conservatives because they champion pro-life ideas, despite their liberal views across other parts of the spectrum? When it comes to electing representatives, will these people cast votes for Republican candidates simply because of the abortion issue? Perhaps so, but, if the pro-life liberals have their way, this will not be the case for long.
As Kristen Day, executive director of Democrats for Life of America (DFLA), said at the recent Cardinal O'Connor Conference on Life at Georgetown University, "There are people out there who agree with 99% of what the Democratic Party stands for, but they vote Republican because of the abortion issue. These are the people we want to reach out to. These are the people we want to welcome back into our party."
The emergence of a young demographic that holds liberal values but is also pro-life is complemented by a movement within the Democratic Party itself that is backing away from the party's traditional pro-choice stance. Day asserted, "[Democrats] are beginning to think that maybe it's not such a good idea to be in bed with NARAL. They're beginning to realize that NARAL has taken control of our party and it's time to kick them out."
According to Day, Democrats first recognized the existence of this problem at the 1996 Democratic National Convention when former Governor Robert Casey (D-PA), a pro-life member of the party, was refused an opportunity to speak. Instead, according to Day, a staff member from his opponent's campaign, a pro-choice Republican, was invited. It was clear that the DNC, said Day, valued a pro-abortion stance over loyalty to and membership in the party. Pro-life Democrats were unwelcome in their own party and were rendered essentially powerless.
In this context, pro-life Democrats began jockeying for a position at the bargaining table, and Day's organization, DFLA, was founded in 1999. But, despite its relatively recent creation, DFLA has grown from a small operation to one boasting nearly forty state chapters nationwide, and real influence with the heads of the Democratic Party. As Day put it, "We've made our way out of the basement and into middle management now, but we're still looking for a seat in the boardroom."
The liberal pro-life movement is not restricted to party politics, however. Feminists for Life of America (FFL) is an organization that emphasizes the reality that America's early feminists, including Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, were, in fact, anti-abortion. As FFL president Serrin Foster said, "Feminism is a philosophy that embraces the rights of all human beings, without exception." It is for this reason, she explained, that early American feminists "condemned abortion in the strongest possible terms." This philosophy guides Foster and FFL as the organization works to "systematically [eliminate] the causes that lead to abortion because women deserve better. That's what Susan B. Anthony asked us to do."
Like DFLA, FFL has achieved great success in recent years by focusing much effort on its College Outreach program. According to a 1996 Gallup Poll, only 37% of high school-aged girls are pro-choice, while 59% of women who have completed some college are pro-choice, and a full 73% of women with a four-year college degree are in favor of abortion rights. According to FFL, this is because college-aged women are constantly exposed to a "one sided message: abortion is essential to women's equality. It's empowering. It's your choice."
In Foster's view, since many beliefs are formed and solidified during the college years, it is possible to make substantial headway among this demographic. This in mind, the College Outreach program works to bring resources to campuses for pregnant students to emphasize that abortion is not the only recourse for a woman facing an unplanned pregnancy. Because of these and other efforts, abortion rates among college-educated women have dropped by an astonishing 30% since FFL began the program in 1996.
Although FFL has been in existence since the time of Roe v. Wade, its recent successes mirror the emergence of DFLA, and reflect a greater trend: it is no longer a contradiction to be both pro-life and liberal. According to Georgetown Right to Life's Danis, it is a movement that is "gaining ground and is really catching on with our generation. Liberals pride themselves as being a voice to the voiceless and this is the ultimate instance of that."
Change is in the Air for the DNC
As the movement progresses and becomes more prominent in the public consciousness, it will become increasingly less likely that pro-life liberals are ignored or written off as anomalies. The DNC leadership that in the past refused to return phone calls to the DFLA office and generally ignored the existence of the pro-life branch of the party is now beginning to embrace it. As Day argues, "Democrats will be released from an abortion litmus test...The time is now for the party to release the stranglehold and allow members to vote their consciences."
Day points out that, despite common perceptions, the vast majority of the party - regardless of members' stances on the legality of the procedure - believes abortion itself is wrong. Despite the original intent of the thirty-two year old Roe v. Wade decision to make abortion safe, legal and rare, attempts to make it rare have been all but abandoned by the Democratic Party, Day said.
In the past, many prominent pro-choice Democrats including President Bill Clinton, Senator Tom Daschle, Representative Richard Gephardt, and Senator Ted Kennedy have publicly made statements declaring their pro-life stances, Day said. She referred to a letter written to voters in the final days of Daschle's 1978 Congressional campaign in which he wrote, "I am opposed to abortion. I do not support it. I have never supported it. It is an abhorrent practice." Day explained that because of pressures from within the party, Daschle, like many other politicians, was forced to change his public views on abortion to coincide with the party's official stance.
DFLA board member Janet Robert, however, believes that this practice is a relic of the past, pointing to the recent selection of Harry Reid (D-NV), a pro-life Democrat, as the Senate Minority leader as evidence. "I think those days [of being forced to take a pro-choice stance] are over. If anything, pressure will turn in [the pro-life] direction."
Much of this optimism stems from the attributes of the field of candidates vying for the DNC Chairmanship. Of the six men running, only three have taken a public stance on the welcoming of pro-life Democrats into the party; each of these have been nothing but supportive of the idea. In fact, former Congressman Tim Roemer (D-IN) is himself pro-life, and has received the backing of both House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senator Reid.
Former Governor Howard Dean (D-VT) is also a candidate and, while he is pro-choice, is strongly in favor of inclusiveness. He said on NBC News' Meet the Press, "I have long believed that we ought to make a home for pro-life Democrats. The Democrats that have stuck with us, who are pro-life, through their long period of conviction, are people who are the kind of pro-life people that we ought to have deep respect for." The only other candidate who has publicly addressed the issue, Simon Rosenberg, founder of the New Democratic Network, has also spoken in favor of welcoming pro-life members into the party without reservation.
This gives great hope to the DFLA and others, including students like Tim Foley (COL '06), the former Georgetown Right to Life vice president and coordinator of the 2005 Cardinal O'Connor Conference. He hopes to see a more inclusive DNC whose members are not subjected to the pro-choice "litmus test" that Day described. He said, "It's clear the Democratic Party is thinking about abortion... If a viable Democratic candidate came along...I would probably vote for him. But I just couldn't get myself to vote for John Kerry because of his track record of voting pro-choice. I feel like a lot of people felt the way I did."
Day is hopeful that with a new DNC Chair - who will replace Terry McAuliffe, the current Chair who has been less than receptive to the pro-life members of his party - DFLA will enjoy new success. "We hope to earn a permanent seat in the Democratic Party," she said.
As the leadership of the DNC changes, so too do grassroots efforts on the local level. As DFLA's Janet Robert explained, "Where the change is occurring is in the states," as opposed to in the national leadership. Robert's claim is substantiated by a July 2004 CBS/New York Times poll that found that "Almost twice as many Democratic delegates as Democratic voters think abortion should be permitted in all cases." Further, a December 2004 Zogby International poll showed that a full 43% of Democrats agreed that "abortion destroys a human life and is manslaughter."
The results of these polls show that, on the whole, the Democratic Party's leadership is disproportionately pro-choice when, in fact, almost half of Democratic voters define abortion as the destruction of a human life. The change is being affected from the bottom of the party up, as the disconnect between the voters and the representatives becomes increasingly significant.
Because of the pressure from its members, the leadership of the Democratic Party is beginning to recognize that, as Howard Dean stated, "We're not the party of abortion," and there is plenty of room for pro-life liberals among their ranks.
"Pro-Woman, Pro-Life"
"We are going to welcome children into this world by welcoming women...because women deserve better than abortion," FFL's Foster said at Georgetown's O'Connor Conference. The goal of her organization is to redefine the feminist movement to abandon its ties to abortion. Foster said, "Abortion is a betrayal - a betrayal of feminism, a betrayal of women." This message is not always received well within feminist circles that are, by and large, pro-choice. Although many women's rights organizations embrace abortion rights as central to feminism, the otherwise liberal movement's pro-life branch is occupied by the FFL, much the way the DNC's is by the DFLA.
As the FFL continues to expand, especially through its College Outreach program, its message becomes increasingly well-received. After hearing Foster speak, a student from Villanova remarked, "When you have speakers who point out why abortion actually exploits women and hurts them along with the child, then it really starts to all make sense. Serrin Foster really showed us by being pro-life you can genuinely help women."
Foster explained that the liberal pro-life movement is gaining ground because, "People are beginning to realize this isn't an issue of Right or Left; it's an issue of right or wrong." She said that in order to succeed, groups like FFL need to saturate the pro-life movement with liberals who "refuse to choose between the woman and the child." DFLA's Robert agreed saying, "We really feel we need pro-woman legislation."
Foster asserted that, "Access to abortion became central to the feminist movement because it 'leveled the playing field' by making women more like men." But, she said, to resolve the problem, the answer is not to allow for the termination of a pregnancy, but to work to change the culture of the corporate world. Foster suggested that when a working woman is faced with discrimination, she needs to declare, "We have children, get over it! Women deserve better!"
A Pro-Life Future?
Kristen Day is quick to point out that without the support of pro-life Democrats no anti-abortion legislation could pass into law. Because a handful of Republicans are pro-choice, a Republican majority does not translate into a pro-life Republican majority, she explains. "Pro-life Democrats are essential to the [pro-life] cause" Day says.
But they are also essential to a Democratic Party that is looking for support wherever it can. According to Newsweek's December 20, 2004, issue, many of the Democratic leaders are beginning to think that the party's staunchly pro-choice stance is responsible for at least some of its recent political decline. In a post-election meeting with supporters, as reported in the magazine, Senator John Kerry (D-MA) explained that the party "needed new ways to make people understand that they didn't like abortion." The former presidential candidate went on to tell his audience that "Democrats also [need] to welcome more pro-life candidates into the party."
As the Democrats are beginning to discern that not all of their members are pro-choice, the pro-life liberal movement is beginning to cause concern among conservative political opponents. As Ken Black of Iowa's Times-Republican writes, "[The pro-life Democratic movement] scares the bejeezers out of me as a loyal Republican. The Democrats are starting their own little clique... This group could spell doom to the GOP at a time when that party's power has never been greater."
Likewise, the pro-abortion rights Planned Parenthood federation of America has said that FFL's College Outreach program is "the newest and most challenging concept in anti-choice campus organizing" and could have a "profound impact" on Planned Parenthood's "advocacy efforts."
As liberals begin to acknowledge the reality that many within their ranks are not, in fact, pro-choice, the Democratic Party and feminist groups, along with other liberal and traditionally pro-choice organizations, may soon see a shift away from abortion-rights advocacy towards a more pro-life stance. What this will mean for the nation remains to be seen. But, according to Foster, because of the "Forty-five million or so American children aborted since Roe v. Wade...this country is oozing grief under the radar screen," causing people and organizations to reevaluate their pro-choice stances. "I really feel like now the door's opening," Day adds.
Curran is editor in chief and an international politics junior.