Amie Newman of RHRealityCheck.org is the latest to bring up one of the latest dividends of the pro-choice “common ground” initiative that tries to find, well, common ground with people who are leery, squishy, or squicked by abortion.
From Feministing:
U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH) was removed from the Democrats For Life of America’s advisory board because he supports contraception.
Apparently, DFA was tired of Ryan consistently harping on this crazy idea that the way to prevent unintended pregnancy is by ensuring access to contraception:
“DFLA gave Congressman Ryan ample opportunities to prove he’s committed to protecting life, but he has turned his back on the community at every turn,” said Kristen Day, the Washington, D.C.-based pro-life organization’s executive director.
What does “ample opportunities to prove he’s committed to protecting life” mean to DFLA? It seems clear that “protecting life” is not about preventing unplanned pregnancy and abortion. According to Ryan,ÂÂ
“We’re working in Congress with groups that agree with preventative options while [the DFLA] is getting left behind,” Ryan said. “I can’t figure out for the life of me how to stop pregnancies without contraception. Don’t be mad at me for wanting to solve the problem.”
...
I think [Ryan’s] removal [from the DFLA board] has the potential to shine a very real light on how extremist many of the anti-choice organizations are. In this case, we now have a legislator who says clearly that he is working in Congress with various groups that can agree that access to contraception is critical. This work will continue with Rep. Ryan while DFA and others insist on sacrificing what most Americans want and need in regards to their sexual and reproductive health, pledging allegiance to rhetoric instead.
And just to keep the flying links confusing, here’s a comment I left on a similar post by Jill Filipovic on the same topic at Feministe.
This sort of thing is the biggest dividend of the “common ground” initiative: it drives a huge wedge between the majority of people who just wish there weren’t as many abortions from… the kind of people who want to use abortion to control (heterosexual?) sexual behavior.
And the thing is it’s not just a wedge issue: I don’t know about Rep. Ryan himself but plenty of people like him really are comfortable with increased support for contraception (which includes making it safer, more effective, easier to use, less expensive, more accessible, and more widely available.) And most are willing to let abortions (however uncomfortable it makes them) as long as they think progress is possible in reducing unwanted, unplanned pregnancies in the first place.
Is that sort of pragmatic “common ground” ideal? No. What would be ideal would be unreserved and unconditional support for women’s reproductive self-determination. But in terms of coalition building it’s far, far better to have them on our side than on the anti-choice side. And just making the “common ground” effort, as we see, works two ways. First, it makes us appear sympathetic to waverers. Second, it drags real hard-core anti-choicers like the DFLA, the Southern Baptist Convention, and the U.S. Congress of Bishops into sunlight… where even to erstwhile allies like Rep. Ryan or even, say, shell-shocked-by-conservatism’s Will Saletan, their creepiness is impossible to miss.
So yeah, no way we’ll ever get to common ground with the DFLA. But then we don’t have to. Creating opportunities for them to alienate their nominal supporters is enough. Because, seriously, do you think they’d have kicked Ryan out if someone else hadn’t reached out to him? No.
Three and a half years ago people were telling me no way. But the result that I was looking for back then is slowly percolating into existence.
What is disturbing to me, that in places where preventing pregnancy is needed the most, the mention of birth control or sex ed in the discussion of the solution, silence ensues.
Post new comment