A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

After Clinching the nomination, Obama has assaulted several of progressive's cherished ideals. Be it separation of church and state or gay rights or wireless wiretapping. But picking a pro-life VP in Kaine with the Supreme Court so delicately balanced will be it. That will be the final straw for me. If he picks Kaine, I am going for Nader or Cynthia.

In Kaine's own words, he has faith-based opposition to abortion, That sounds like pro-life to me. I am sorry, I am not going to vote for anybody who has such a position. Why should I support anybody with whom I have such a fundamental difference.

Tags: Kaine, VP (all tags)

Comments

40 Comments

Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

Kaine is not Pro-life and this is not a diary.

by BlueGAinDC 2008-08-18 05:16PM | 0 recs
Yes he is pro-life
In his own words, he has faith-based opposition to abortion.
Speaks like pro-life, sounds like pro-life, must be pro-life.
by ann0nymous 2008-08-18 05:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes he is pro-life

He does not favor overturning Roe v. Wade, therefore, he is not pro-life.

A personal opposition to abortion does not make someone pro-life. There are a large number of Democrats and pro-choicers who are personally opposed to abortion based on faith or a number of other things, and they are still pro-choice.

Clearly, you just want an excuse to justify not voting for Obama. No one here is going to help you do that. You are the one who will be going into the voting booth, so you can decide whether the war in Iraq, health care, the economy, and many other issues are more important than whether Obama's VP is personally opposed to abortion because of his faith.

by BlueGAinDC 2008-08-18 05:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes he is pro-life

HEAR, HEAR! Obama summed up my abortions feelings perfectly. The entire issue of abortion as we know it is a smokescreen set up by Republicans to pull in Americans who consider themselves people of faith, which is a great majority.
The question shouldn't be "Should we make abortion illegal ?". It should be "How can we educate women so that they don't get pregnant in the first place, and if they do,what alternatives can we provide for them so they don't want to have an abortion?"

And by the the way, I am one of these people that have what the OD called "A faith-based opposition to abortion" I have NEVER voted Republican in my life and I have no intent.
But if the Democrats can just change the conversation just a little bit on the abortion issue, so we can stop being branded "pro-abortion".

Because at the end of the day, We DEMOCRATS CAN STILL VOTE TO KEEP ABORTION LEGAL, YET STRIVE TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ABORTIONS

We need to get out of the box that Bush put us in!

by xodus1914 2008-08-19 05:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Yes he is pro-life

A personal position is not a legislative position. Do any of his legislative actions as Gov. or anything else say he does not support choice legislatively or from a legal stand point.

His is catholic for goodness sakes, not many catholics are pro-choice on a personal level and still supporting a women's right to choose and Roe v Wade.

by jsfox 2008-08-18 05:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes he is pro-life

I am personally opposed to abortion.  I think it is a moral evil.  If any of the women in my life had an unplanned pregnancy and asked me for advice, I could never advise her to have an abortion.

However, I do not think it is murder, and I do believe that women have the right to choose whether or not to have an abortion.  I am pro-choice, even as I think abortion is morally wrong.

Am I too pro-life for you?

by mistersite 2008-08-18 05:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes he is pro-life

out of curiosity, if it isn't murder, then why is it a "moral evil?"

by slynch 2008-08-18 07:43PM | 0 recs
Killing a dog for no reason...

is a moral evil, but is not murder.  Same basic concept--a fetus is not yet human in a real sense, so killing it isn't murder, but it is still a sentient life form being killed off, so killing it isn't exactly blameless*.  And the fact that, unlike the dog, a fetus would potentially become human and thus "murderable" later on just adds even more moral squeamishness to the issue.

*Note that abortion is not an evil, moral or otherwise, if the health/life of the mother is at stake or the fetus is clearly nonviable, because that is not reasonless killing.  To continue the dog metaphor, the former would be like a starving person killing a dog in order to eat it and thus survive, and the latter would be like euthenizing a dog with a terminal illness that caused it excruciating pain.

(Counting down to the inevitable "OMG, HOW DARE U COMPARE A FETUS 2 A DOGGIE!" response--three...two...one...)

by Elsinora 2008-08-18 09:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Killing a dog for no reason...

Sounds like more of a definitional issue. Some people define the killing of an animal as murder too.

by Cincinnatus 2008-08-18 09:28PM | 0 recs
Murder is defined as...

the unlawful killing of a human being.  That IS the definition, and is not up for debate, however much the PETA crowd wishes it were.

So unless you define animals as human (which, once again, isn't up for debate as animals lack the prerequisite human DNA), what "some people" define as murder doesn't mean diddley squat, pure and simple.

by Elsinora 2008-08-18 09:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Murder is defined as...

Nonetheless, people are going to use the word to mean different things. Some of them use it to mean deliberate killing, plain and simple. Likely because it has more emotional impact.

by Cincinnatus 2008-08-18 09:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Killing a dog for no reason...

Well, I'm pro-choice, but I think it's hair-splitting to define murder in the way you have.  One definition of murder is "to kill inhumanly or barbarously." (see dictionary.com for starters)  That definition doesn't restrict the killing to a person, and so it could apply equally to dogs or fetuses.  Basically, a generic definition of murder is simply 'wrongful killing,' and that's how many state statutes define it before delineating special types.  And, yes, most people would say that if you shot their dog for no reason, it would be murder.

All this is to say that I think it's a tenuous position to argue that abortion is a moral evil but then claim it isn't murder.  It's hard to see what would make it "evil."  It's easier, in my view, to say it isn't evil, because it isn't killing--a fetus is not "alive" in any usual definition of the term.  Additionally, the ambiguity in defining life, to me, is why I believe I don't have the right to tell someone else whether they can have an abortion.  Personally, I don't like abortion, but I can understand why people do it, and, under certain circumstances, I'd even encourage my spouse to have one.

As for whether there's a "reason" to kill, that's really a moot issue, because anyone who has an abortion has a reason.

by slynch 2008-08-19 07:54AM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

Kaine does not seek to ban abortion, and your stance is completely illogical given that you want to preserve the Supreme Court (by throwing your vote away).

by rfahey22 2008-08-18 05:22PM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

Kaine is not Pro-life. He is Catholic,which means he thinks abortion is immoral.  Pro-life means you think Roe vs. Wade should be overturned. These two views don't neccessarily go hand in hand.  

by epiphany 2008-08-18 05:26PM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

Finally, a voice in the wilderness.....

Good clarity.

by xodus1914 2008-08-19 05:55AM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

I have a philosophically-based opposition to abortion. I am pro-choice. These two things do not cancel each other out.

by Cincinnatus 2008-08-18 05:35PM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

Tom Ridge is pro-Choice, he announced that if he got the VP spot, he'd vote pro-life. Do you think that HE would promote a pro-choice agenda? No? Well, I don't think that any Democrat in the VP spot would promote a pro-life agenda, either.

by vcalzone 2008-08-18 05:40PM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

A personal position is not a legislative position. Do any of his legislative actions as Gov. or anything else say he does not support choice legislatively or from a legal stand point.

His is catholic for goodness sakes, not many catholics are pro-choice on a personal level and still supporting a women's right to choose and Roe v Wade.

by jsfox 2008-08-18 05:40PM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

ooops sorry for the double post

by jsfox 2008-08-18 05:41PM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

I also challenge you to present evidence of Obama's so-called assault on separation of church and state and gay rights. As for wireless wiretapping, well, I'm not even sure what that is, but it sounds hard.

by Cincinnatus 2008-08-18 05:41PM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

You should really team up with kosnomore.  Together, the two of you could be an unstoppable trolling force.

by username 2008-08-18 05:54PM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

kos already has trolling buddy, it's zerosumgame.

by venician 2008-08-18 06:48PM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

And his sockpuppet that he occasionally accidentally posts as.

by Cincinnatus 2008-08-18 07:39PM | 0 recs
Here's Kaine's abortion stance

Sounds remarkably similar to what I understand Obama's to be? Obama doesn't give his PERSONAL view on abortion, but otherwise they have the same stance (as it relates to policy / political agenda). Both men are CLEARLY more pro-choice than McCain.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Governor/Tim_ Kaine_Abortion.htm

"I will reduce abortion in Virginia by enforcing current Virginia restrictions, passing an enforceable ban on partial-birth abortion, ensuring women's access to health care (including legal contraception), and promoting abstinence-focused education and adoption. We should reduce abortion in this manner, rather than by criminalizing women and doctors."

"I have a faith-based opposition to abortion. As governor, I will work in good faith to reduce abortions by:

1. Enforcing the current Virginia restrictions on abortion and passing an enforceable ban on partial birth abortion that protects the life and health of the mother

2. Fighting teen pregnancy through abstinence-focused education

3. Ensuring women's access to health care (including legal contraception) and economic opportunity

4. Promoting adoption as an alternative for women facing unwanted pregnancies.

Too often politicians are interested in scoring political points, rather than in reducing the number of abortions. Many of the legislative proposals introduced in the General Assembly, like the ones to require unnecessary building standards for doctor's offices that perform abortions, are just political grandstanding. They encourage division and lawsuits rather than contributing to the goal of reducing abortions."

by twinmom 2008-08-18 05:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Here's Kaine's abortion stance

Thank you for posting that.

by Cincinnatus 2008-08-18 05:56PM | 0 recs
Hasn't this McCanard.....

been McDone McBefore?

by Glaurung 2008-08-18 05:57PM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

Sounds like the majority of the people on this blog just got drummed out of the party.

by Cincinnatus 2008-08-18 06:35PM | 0 recs
Re: I was thinking the same thing
Yeah, and Damnit, I'm sick of it.
I'm sick and tired of  having to bite my tounge around Democrats who seem to think I'm less of a Dem  because I don't think that abortions should be without restriction  and free.
I'm like "I don't want Roe v. Wade overturned, but can you PLEASE hear me out?:
by xodus1914 2008-08-19 06:01AM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

Rec'd and mojo'd. Unacceptability plus Veep plus dire warning of non-vote. Awesome combo!

by QTG 2008-08-18 08:22PM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

Bingo!

by Cincinnatus 2008-08-18 08:29PM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

I don't believe it is accurate to call Kaine pro-life.  He seems to be squishy on abortion, which is legitimate cause for concern, but that doesn't make him an advocate for letting government override a woman's right to choose.

Particularly south of the Mason-Dixon Line, it's quite standard for Democrats to claim that they personally oppose abortion (or gay marriage, or whatever) for religious reasons, but that they don't believe government should interfere, blah blah blah.  That's not exactly the full-throated defense of women's rights I'd like to see, but unless we're happy with being a minority, regional party that stands by while the GOP appoints all the Supreme Court Justices, we kinda have to accept this rhetorical squishiness as a cost of doing business.

I have no problem with Democrats opposing the nomination of someone like Kaine for VP in favor of a Democrat who would be stronger on the choice issue.  It's always possible, after all, that the VP will end up in the big chair somehow, and it's reasonable for liberals to be concerned when organizations like Democrats for Life express enthusiasm for someone like Kaine.  But when the rubber meets the road, defenders of choice will be far better off voting for a ticket with some amount of rhetorical squishiness, rather than voting third-party and possibly helping a radical anti-choice politician like John McCain win the election.  It's entirely possible, after all, that the fate of Roe v. Wade will hinge upon the next four or eight years' worth of Supreme Court appointments.

by Steve M 2008-08-18 08:53PM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

Democrats for Life are not pro-lifers. They seek to reduce teh number of abortions by 95% over the next 10 years.
They do not advocate overturning Roe v. Wade.
However, they do advocate placing some type of legal access on abortion, and this is where they are at odds with most Dems. Ultimately, though, they are softening on this issue, as they see the National Democrat Party soften on their traditional hard-line stance on abortion.

This is from their website :
    "We will defend the dignity of all Americans against those who would undermine it. Because we believe in the privacy and equality of women, we stand proudly for a woman's right to choose, consistent with Roe v. Wade, and regardless of her ability to pay. We stand firmly against Republican efforts to undermine that right. At the same time, we strongly support family planning and adoption incentives. Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare."[1]

by xodus1914 2008-08-19 06:38AM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

I don't know where you got that from on their website.  Here is what their "about us" page reads:

Who We Are

   Democrats for Life of America, Inc. is a national organization for pro-life members of the Democratic party.

Our Mission

   Democrats for Life of America exists to foster respect for life, from the beginning of life to natural death. This includes, but is not limited to, opposition to abortion, capital punishment, and euthanasia. Democrats for Life of America is one of over 200 member organizations of Consistent Life: an international network for peace, justice and life.

What We Do

   We mobilize Democrats at local, state, and national levels to:

       * elect pro-life Democrats to office
        * support pro-life Democrats while in an elected position
        * promote a pro-life plank in the Democratic Party platform
        * achieve pro-life legislation with the help of national and state pro-life democrats
        * participate actively in Democratic party functions and offices

by Steve M 2008-08-19 07:31AM | 0 recs
My dear little blunt object,

I am a Jew.  I have a faith based opposition to abortion in many circumstances.  What that means is that

(a) I would not have an abortion myself (unless my health/life were at stake, in which case Jewish law would require me to have one).

(b) If a pregnant woman came to me for advice in dealing with her unwanted pregnancy, I would advise her to either keep the baby or put it up for adoption (knowing that if she then chose to ignore my advice, that is her right and her business, not mine).

It does not mean that I am "pro-life" in the political sense.  I am a staunch believer in the "safe, legal, and rare" doctrine as the best course of action, and am willing to take to the streets in protest to defend Roe v. Wade because it is a far greater evil in my view to deny women with health problems the right to a lifesaving abortion than to allow women with no health issues at all to have abortions for (in my view) insignificant reasons.

So take your pitiful pseudo-logic and stuff it up your arse, mmkay?

by Elsinora 2008-08-18 09:09PM | 0 recs
and that is who you'll get..... just to get

republican votes, because you're all in the tank for him.... reap what you sowed!

by suzieg 2008-08-19 01:30AM | 0 recs
Re: and that is who you'll get..... just to get

See what you attracted?  Sad commentary on this diary.

by Jess81 2008-08-19 01:36AM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

There are millions of Democrats who agree with Kaine's views.

I find abortion to be abhorrent. But I would never want to overturn Roe. I am interested in keeping abortion safe and legal, while reducing the number performed through education, increased contraception usage, and adoption.

by PSUdan 2008-08-19 07:50AM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

You know, I think we need a name for the millions of Democrats that have the same position as you and I.
It seems like there is a third option here, not totally pro-choice, but not really conventionally pro-life either.

Maybe Neo-Life?

Choice Plus ?

How about Life-Choice?

Suggestions, anyone?

by xodus1914 2008-08-19 09:27AM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

I just wish we could reclaim the term pro-life.

We're the anti-war party.

We're the anti-death penalty party.

We're the universal health care party.

We're the party for women's health.

How are we not the pro-life party?

by Cincinnatus 2008-08-19 09:30AM | 0 recs
Re: A pro-life VP will be completely unacceptable

Or as I always said...

Save the Whales

Save the Trees

Save the Babies

I mean, Rethugs are all about NOT putting their money where their mouth is. They want to get rid of abortion, so there are more kids running around, but then they don't want to support the programs to feed and educate them.

I don't know how Democrats got roped into the pro-abortion stance.....

by xodus1914 2008-08-19 09:37AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads