Abortion – Abortion Clinics, Abortion Pill, Abortion Information

I’m going to admit something to you that I’ve never told anyone outside my closest friends and family. When I was a pre-pubescent adolescent, I wrote in my diary that I thought abortion was wrong. I did not understand why or how women would choose it as an option. At the time, I was steeped in the teachings of the evangelical movement due to the influence of a maternal uncle who had been taking me to attend church services at Christ for the Nations Institute in Dallas where he was enrolled.

To this day, I have always respected people whose perspectives on abortion differ from the strongly pro-choice one that I have since come to adopt. Maybe because I once held those same beliefs, I understand how the “moral” teachings of one’s church can instill a sincere belief that abortion is wrong.

But, while I have respect for a point of view that differs from mine, I draw the line when someone’s perspective on what is “moral” is imposed on those of us who see things differently, particularly where the imposition of that perspective demands that I give up my right to make decisions about my own body, my own future, and my own understanding of what is best for me and my family. I particularly take issue with that imposition when, instead of representing an honest difference of ideals and values, it is used as a wedge to gain political advantage. And, really, that’s what the conversation about abortion rights and the proposed appointment of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court is pretty much all about right now—politics.

How did my own thinking on abortion evolve? It’s simple really. I opened my heart to the understanding of other women’s stories. I saw the role that reproductive autonomy through contraceptive care played in my own ability to rise from struggling single mom to Harvard Law School grad. In short, I began living a life of empathy and understanding. I came to see that no outsider should ever be allowed to impose his or her judgment on what women know to be best for ourselves. And then, many years after becoming pro-choice, I made an abortion decision myself, terminating a much-wanted pregnancy after the discovery of a fatal fetal abnormality. I cannot imagine someone making such a deeply personal decision for me.

Women choose abortion for a myriad of reasons. No single one of them is exactly alike. Each story is as unique as the woman who can tell it, should she choose to do so. Some, like me, make wrenching decisions when faced with devastating news. Some are survivors of sexual abuse. Some are already mothers, both single ones and married ones, living the challenge of providing for children that they already have. Some are in high school or college and have dreams of making something of their lives before they become mothers, if ever.

What we know about reproductive rights, including abortion, is that when the Supreme Court enshrined those rights with the protection of law, women’s ability to decide when and whether to have children changed our trajectory. We no longer had the threat of losing our lives if we chose not to carry an unplanned pregnancy to term. We became the authors of our destiny. We made a bold step toward what it means to live as equal citizens of this country and of this world.

I cannot state this more strongly: we cannot afford to go back. And even if you believe abortion is a decision you would not make for yourself, I hope you’ll fight alongside your sisters who have made or who might make such a decision in the future.

Make no mistake about it, we WILL go back if Brett Kavanaugh is appointed to the Supreme Court. How do I know this? It’s simple—because it’s what Trump has said he would do with his next Supreme Court appointment. And it’s what Kavanaugh himself has made clear he will do, having previously praised the dissentin Roe v. Wade and having opined in a recent appellate decision that he thought the government had a right to deny a young immigrant woman access to abortion care.

Let’s be clear what this is all about. The political forces supporting Kavanaugh’s appointment aren’t just trying to end abortion. They’re trying to stop women from controlling our own lives, families, and futures. They are dead-set on making sure that women will remain unequal in the eyes of the law, society, and the economy. Their success will devastate any hope that we have of living to our fullest potential. So, yes, the stakes are high and our voices are needed as much, if not more, than they’ve ever been.

I realize that the battle over Kavanaugh’s confirmation may look like it’s a lost cause because I know what it’s like to believe that the deck is stacked so high against you that you are tempted to give up before you even start. I live in Texas after all, and I’ve faced many overwhelmingly high “decks” in the past. But, just as I tell the young #Changemakers that we work with at my non-profit, Deeds Not Words, we cannot let long odds keep us from engaging in a fight worth waging.

For the doubters, you need only to recall our battle here in Texas in June of 2013 against an anti-abortion bill making its way through the Texas legislature. In a state where we’ve become conditioned to give up in the face of overwhelming political and social challenges, where many of us don’t even bother to vote because we don’t think it will make a difference—even in this state—we’ve learned that we can make a difference when we decide not to cede our power. We, through the “People’s Filibuster,” armed with the personal stories of the thousands of women who sent them to us to be read on the Senate floor that day, demonstrated that we truly do possess the power to change things when we show up, stand up and fight with everything we have for what we believe to be right.

Wendy Davis and Senate Democrats cheer during her filibuster of abortion bills at the Texas Capitol.

GETTY IMAGESROBERT DAEMMRICH PHOTOGRAPHY INC

What made the difference in Texas that day—the reason we were able to kill that anti-abortion bill by talking it past the midnight deadline for a vote—is the same thing that will make a difference in whether Kavanaugh is successfully appointed to the Supreme Court. That difference is YOU. That difference is making a decision to fight, even if you think we might lose. Our sisters, our daughters, and the daughters of our daughters are relying on us to give this all we’ve got. Are you in? Because I most certainly am.

Wendy Davis is the Founder of Deeds Not Words and was a member of the Texas Senate from 2009 to 2015. She will be on the road this year with the Rise Up for Roe tour.

Source: https://www.elle.com/culture/career-politics/a22717606/wendy-davis-abortion-supreme-court-justice-nominee-brett-kavanaugh-rise-up-for-roe/

The majority of women who have abortions are already mothers. Being a parent makes me support choice

The voices of the anti-choice movement have a specific vision of their enemy. It’s a selfish, reckless young woman who believes in abortion out of “convenience.” It certainly couldn’t be a man, because men don’t care about these things. It couldn’t be a woman who understands the experience of motherhood, because once you hold a little baby in your arms, you could never condone abortion. This of course it patently untrue. And it drives the enemies of reproductive rights crazy.

Earlier this week, my friend Deborah Copaken wrote an honest, fearless account of her reproductive history — three children and two abortions. She explained the personal and health reasons she terminated two pregnancies at different stages in her life, and also why she chose to go forward with an unplanned pregnancy in her late 30s. Here’s a simple inconvenient truth opponents of choice don’t want to acknowledge — for a lot of women, abortion makes their future families possible. My friend’s entire adult life, a life that includes three great kids, would be unimaginable without the abortions that have also been a part of it.

Deborah is not unique; plenty of the mothers I’m friends with have had abortions. Plenty of yours have too, whether you want to admit it or not. Here’s your evidence. According to the Guttmacher Institute, “Fifty-nine percent of abortions in 2014 were obtained by patients who had had at least one birth.” And sorry, the women having abortions aren’t godless heathens: “Seventeen percent of abortion patients in 2014 identified as mainline Protestant, 13% as evangelical Protestant and 24% as Catholic.” Yup, a full quarter of the women seeking abortions are Catholic, just like I am. Put that in your conclave and smoke it.

I know mothers who’ve had abortions when they were young and their circumstances would have made raising a child impossible. I know mothers who had them when they were older and they had serious health considerations. They had them for all kinds of reasons. They were all deeply personal and all made thoughtfully, because no one has any better sense of their private needs and those of their families than they do. End of story.

I have never had an abortion. I’ve had two children and I’ve had one miscarriage from an unplanned pregnancy. I still grieve that loss, and would have gone forward if my body had not had other ideas, despite the far less than ideal circumstances in my life at the time. I also spent two years in a clinical trial for late stage cancer, and I would not have hesitated for a moment to choose to terminate if I’d become pregnant during that time. Not when the choice would have been between continuing treatment and living or miscarrying and dying. Any religious or political leader who would take that option from a woman, from a mother trying not to die so she can raise her children, honestly has no sense of how valuing life actually works. Or, for that matter, the blessing of choice.

Few things I can say in public provoke more logic-defying fury than when I mention that because I was conceived out of wedlock before Roe v. Wade, my mother didn’t have the options I have been blessed with and that I fight for my daughters to keep. I, unlike pundits like Kevin Williamson, do not rejoice in my mother’s forced parenthood — a situation that my father, who walked away before I was even born, never had to endure.

“But you wouldn’t be alive now!” the eager anti-choice voices cry. Well, yeah, I wouldn’t be alive now if my mother hadn’t sat next to my father at the cafeteria either. I wouldn’t be alive now if I died that time I almost drowned when I was 17. And I definitely wouldn’t be alive if I’d died of cancer. Meanwhile, my daughters know that they were planned and wholeheartedly wanted.

About a year ago I got an email from a young woman whose mother had experienced a high risk pregnancy but decided to continue it, resulting in her beloved sibling. She truly couldn’t understand why a mother might make a different choice. I told her the key word there was “choice.” Her mother got to make a decision about her pregnancy. What sadist would deprive any other woman of the same right? Why demand that women die — and women keep dying, all across the world, every day — so they can carry nonviable fetuses? Why demand they give birth to babies they aren’t financially, physically, or mentally competent to care for? Could it be about something other than fetuses? Like a fury over women controlling their own lives? I don’t expect to change anybody’s mind, by the way, I’m just spitballing here.

“Close your legs” and its corollary, “Tell you daughters to close their legs” is a thing that people actually write to me all the time. And if that doesn’t tell you a whole lot about the fear and contempt surrounding women’s sexuality that’s at the slimy bottom of the anti-choice rhetoric, I don’t know what is. Believe me, I am all for women refusing to have sex with men who don’t support their bodily autonomy, and the fewer d-bags getting laid out there the happier I am. That said, this specious argument ignores reality. For starters, it puts the entire burden of pregnancy prevention on women, despite the necessary male component of impregnation. Second, the Guttmacher Institute reveals that “Fifty-one percent of abortion patients in 2014 were using a contraceptive method in the month they became pregnant.” Shocker! Contraception doesn’t always work. Third, there’s something called sexual assault. Rapists don’t really pay attention to your evangelical insistence on clenching your knees.

There are people who would truly rather women and their doctors be murdered than see them have access to a safe and (so far) constitutionally protected right. I hear from these men all the time. (It’s mostly men.) They don’t care about our country’s shameful maternal mortality rate. They don’t care about healthcare or education. I get truly scary vitriol sent my way regularly, but it really ramps up whenever I express the fact that I’m a mother who supports choice and who wants my teenage daughters to have the freedom to choose when and if they have children. This means access to birth control, morning after pills and abortion. Because I love them more than anything in the universe and I want them to be educated, independent, and healthy. People who want to protect their daughters are called mothers. And people who are frightened of that prospect are called misogynists.

Source: https://www.salon.com/2018/08/01/why-mothers-defend-roe-v-wade-abortion-is-a-fact-of-life-for-parents-too/

So-called crisis pregnancy centers sometimes masquerade as abortion providers and attract patients with offers of free pregnancy tests, but most operate with the over-arching mission of preventing abortions.

A new billboard campaign in Northern California aims to educate the public about the deceptive tactics of “crisis pregnancy centers,” according to the campaign sponsors.

The five billboards went up in Sacramento and Fresno funded by the national Abortion Care Network. More are planned for Chico. Organizers said these locales are where anti-choice pregnancy centers have deliberately set up near independent abortion providers.

The timing of the billboards follows a recent decision, NIFLA v. Becerra, in which the U.S. Supreme Court sided with California anti-choice pregnancy centers that challenged the state’s 2015 reproductive disclosure law. The Reproductive Fact Act required pregnancy centers to post a brief notice that described how to access all reproductive health options, including abortion, through state programs. Unlicensed facilities also had to disclose that fact.

Pro-choice advocates call the deceptive anti-choice centers “fake clinics.”

“Now that the fake clinics are not going to be held accountable because of NIFLA v. Becerra, the real question is … how can we get patients to the services they need in a very transparent and easy way,” said Monica McLemore, a San Francisco nurse and abortion provider whose face appears on the billboards.

With close proximity to abortion clinics and with names that mimic abortion facilities, anti-choice pregnancy centers have been known to confuse and mislead patients—when what patients need is “care they can trust,” McLemore told Rewire.News.

These anti-choice pregnancy centers outnumber abortion clinics in this country, although by how much isn’t clear. The facilities sometimes masquerade as abortion providers and attract patients with offers of free pregnancy tests, but most operate with the over-arching mission of preventing abortions. Federal and independent investigations have caught staff at such facilities misleading patients, exaggerating the risks of abortion, and delaying care.

“That’s really what this campaign is about: Trying to get patients the care they need that is ethical, accurate, and without delay, shame, or deception,” McLemore said.

The new billboards follow an outreach effort in the Bay Area earlier this year. That campaign sought to debunk claims that abortion pill “reversal” is sound health care, and it pushed back against a controversial decision last year by the state nursing board to allow training on abortion “reversal.” Meanwhile, advocacy groups have targeted Google’s Bay Area workers over the search giant’s maps, ads, and results that direct people who Google “abortion clinic” to anti-choice pregnancy centers.

McLemore said the new campaign targets the cities of Fresno and Sacramento in part because of the area’s prominent anti-choice billboards. With messages such as: “Pregnant? Scared? Call Us,” the billboards funnel callers to deceptive anti-choice centers in the area.

“It’s really problematic when those billboards are directing people to places that don’t offer health services,” she said.

The campaign’s landing page includes resources to report an anti-abortion center and to find a legitimate abortion provider.

The billboards are expected to remain up for 30 days.

CORRECTION: This story has been updated to correctly identify the locations of the planned billboards.

Source: https://rewire.news/article/2018/08/10/anti-choice-centers-targeted-in-california-billboard-campaign/

What a woman chooses to do with her body should not be up for debate in 2018.

Liberal groups are working to stop Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation – which could threaten to unravel abortion rights

Protesters opposed to the nomination of supreme court pick Brett Kavanaugh on Capitol Hill on 1 August. Photograph: Win McNamee/Getty Images

Two thousand Planned Parenthood organizers and volunteers, mostly female and young, gathered recently in Detroit to imagine what they see as a kinder, more peaceful America.

But eighteen months and counting into the presidency of Donald Trump and with the threat of a conservative supreme court that could unravel abortion rights in the US, their mission was nothing short of political trench warfare.

“Are women going to be equal members of this society or not? Are they going to have equal rights or not?” said Deirdre Schifeling, the executive director of Planned Parenthood Action Fund said. “That is what is on the line.”

As part of that fight, the 100-year-old women’s health organization convened Power of Pink, the “biggest, baddest, raddest grassroots training ever”. Planned Parenthood, along with a coalition of other liberal groups, are working to mobilize opposition to Brett Kavanaugh, whose supreme court nomination was been cheered by social conservatives as a chance to finally overturn Roe v Wade, the 1973 landmark supreme court decision that established a constitutional right to abortion.

The stakes are particularly high as Kavanaugh would replace moderate Justice Anthony Kennedy, a sometime-swing vote who embraced more liberal views on abortion.

The volunteers at the Power of Pink training are the ground troops in an uphill, multi-million dollar battle to stop Kavanaugh from being confirmed to the supreme court.

“I have my kevlar on. I have my boots on, my pink camouflage. I’m ready to fight,” said Peshka Calloway, an Army veteran from Parkersburg, West Virginia.

Calloway has relied on Planned Parenthood for care and support after being sexually assaulted by a fellow soldier. Now she’s doing everything she can to protect the organization and the reproductive health services it provides.

“I may even run for office,” she exclaimed, having just left a candidate training run by Emily’s List, which helps to elect pro-choice women. “A lot of people tell me I should.”

The three-day training was held at the Cobo Center, a sprawling structure in downtown Detroit with a glass atrium boasting views of Ontario, Canada. That just across the Detroit River, healthcare is free and the prime minister is an unapologetic feminist was not lost on attenders.

FacebookTwitterPinterest

Throughout the weekend, participants heard from Cecile Richards, who recently stepped down after serving more than a decade as president of Planned Parenthood, Debbie Stabenow, a US senator from Michigan, and Barack Obama, who applauded their activism in a pre-taped video. Then, in break-out sessions and panels, they strategized how to stop Kavanaugh’s confirmation.

In the Senate, Democrats alone do not have the votes to derail a supreme court confirmation. But if they hold their party together and persuade two Republican senators to their side it would be a death knell for Kavanaugh’s nomination.

The plan is to pressure red-state Democrats like senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia who are still undecided on Kavanaugh and moderate Republicans like Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine, who have said they support abortion access. It is widely seen as a long shot, but that is not deterring them.

“We know from the fight over the Affordable Care Act that hearing from thousands of Alaskans across the state really impacted her decision,” Jessica Cler, an organizer with Planned Parenthood in Anchorage, said of Murkowski, who helped block a Republican bill that would have repealed the healthcare law. “We know it will be the same with Scotus, so folks are doing anything and everything they can to make sure that she’s hearing from us.”

Yet in interviews with the Washington Post, Murkowski and Collins said they felt the emotional pleas from constituents over the supreme court nominee have “less intensity” than the stories they heard during the healthcare debate. But the senators acknowledged that the personal appeals had affected them.

Already Planned Parenthood volunteers have made hundreds of calls to the senators’ offices and sent postcards and letters from women sharing their personal stories. They also published op-eds in the hometown newspapers of key senators.

Planned Parenthood and a coalition of advocacy groups have launched an offensive against Kavanaugh that will give volunteers the chance to put their training into practice. Supporters will participate in more than 100 actions across the country this week “to sound the alarm on how Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court would threaten people’s health and rights”.

FacebookTwitterPinterest

Meanwhile, Susan B Anthony List, an anti-abortion political organization, launched a seven-state campaign to pressure vulnerable Democrats to confirm Kavanaugh as part of a broader effort to help galvanize opponents of abortion ahead of the 2018 midterms.

Behind the sharp political debateare deeply personal, and often painful, experiences, said Síona Cahill, an Irish pro-choice activist who helped mobilize voters to repeal Ireland’s near-total ban on abortion.

In one of the most warmly received speeches for volunteers in Detroit, shesaid the Irish campaign was successful because thousands of women broke their silence and shared their stories.

“We didn’t make it about those who disagreed with us,” she said. “We made it about the people that a ban on full reproductive rights affects: everyone.”

A majority of Americans have long believed that abortion should be legal and that share has only climbed since Kavanaugh was nominated. That gives abortion rights advocates hope that a public pressure campaign could sway votes in the Senate.

“It has been the singular goal of the anti-abortion right to get the courts packed with conservative justices who will overturn Roe,” said Dawn Laguens, executive vice president of Planned Parenthood Action Fund. “They were gleeful until they realized that their glee collided with what the American people want.”

Planned Parenthood and coalition of pro-choice groups have demanded that lawmakers oppose Kavanaugh unless he commits to affirm the “right of all people to make personal decisions about their bodies,” including the right to use contraception and access abortion. He will almost certainly decline to answer questions about how he would rule from the bench during his confirmation hearing.

While Kavanaugh has not ruled directly on abortion, Laguens said his writings and speeches are evidence enough to justify their worst fears.

“It may not be the Handmaid’s Tale,” Laguens said. “But it won’t be pretty.”

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/09/pro-choice-groups-fight-against-trump-supreme-court-pick

Abortion-rights advocates are intensifying efforts to make it easier for women to get abortions amid a new wave of state-level bans and restrictions expected to occur under a reconfigured U.S. Supreme Court. The efforts include boosting financial aid for women needing to travel long distances to get an abortion, and raising awareness about the option of do-it-yourself abortions.

The sense of urgency stems from the retirement of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who sometimes provided the decisive vote in support of abortion rights, and the possibility that Brett Kavanaugh, nominated by President Donald Trump to replace him, would give the court an anti-abortion majority.

Advocates anticipate new limits on abortion access in red states that are emboldened by the prospect of a more solidly conservative court. The Republican-led states want more latitude in the courts to impose far-reaching abortion restrictions while hoping that a lawsuit on the issue makes its way to the Supreme Court and is the case that ultimately overturns Roe v. Wade — the 1973 establishing a nationwide right to abortion.

Yamani Hernandez, executive director of the National Network of Abortion Funds, said that since Kennedy’s retirement announcement on June 27, there has been a surge of donations to help the network assist low-income women in paying for their abortions. There are 70 funds in 38 states, currently assisting about one-fifth of the 150,000 women who inquire about assistance each year.

“Without a doubt we’re moving into a bleaker time,” Hernandez said. “People who haven’t been paying attention are realizing what is at stake, and wanting to get involved.”

If Roe were overturned, abortion-rights advocates anticipate that 20 or more states would ban most abortions. Women in those states might face long and costly interstate journeys to reach an abortion provider, or they could avail themselves of information about how to self-induce an abortion.

The two main abortion-inducing drugs, mifepristone and misoprostol, are legally available only through authorized medical professionals in the U.S., and numerous states have placed restrictions on medical abortions. In many places abroad, misoprostol is widely available, even over the counter in pharmacies in some countries, and has been used extensively for self-induced abortions in countries such as Brazil that have restrictive laws.

For American women, the most likely means of obtaining misoprostol is via an online purchase from a foreign provider. That method is considered difficult to prevent, even in states with laws explicitly banning self-induced abortion.

A 2-year-old California-based organization, the Self-Inducted Abortion Legal Team, is expanding its operations this summer, convinced that the ongoing push for tougher abortion restrictions will prompt more women to consider the self-induced option.

Jill Adams, the team’s founder and chief strategist, said a top priority is to provide legal advice and support for any women who face possible prosecution for do-it-yourself abortions. Her group plans to launch a help line this fall that will provide callers with basic advice and, if warranted, connect them with an attorney in their area.

Her team and its allies are advocating that states avoid such prosecutions, a goal recently backed by two major medical associations.

Dr. Jamila Perritt, a Washington, D.C.-based obstetrician-gynecologist who provides abortions, says she has counseled some women who opted for self-induced abortions, and is grateful that they now have relatively safe and effective means of doing that, thanks to the abortion pill.

“Whatever happens with the Supreme Court, there are safer options now that we didn’t have 40 years ago,” she said.

Anti-abortion leaders are troubled by the positive talk about self-induced abortion.

“This kind of effort is dangerous and highly irresponsible,” said Carol Tobias, president of the National Right to Life Committee. She evoked the potential difficulties of women who used that method and then suffered serious side effects.

Tobias said her organization does not favor criminal action against women who self-abort, and instead would prefer targeting those who make the medicine available.

Many of the abortion-related topics now being discussed in the context of the Supreme Court vacancy will be summarized in a book being written by journalist and activist Robin Marty, titled “Handbook for a Post-Roe America.” It is scheduled for publication on Jan. 22, the 46th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision.

Marty describes the book as “a step-by-step guide explaining what any person can do once abortion becomes illegal or inaccessible in the U.S.” It covers possible legislative action, ways of supporting women who need to cross state lines for abortions, and the key factors involved in considering a self-induced abortion.

“The internet will be a great way to find information, but it’s a double-edged sword because it leaves a trail,” Marty said. “How do you access these things online without being able to be tracked?”

Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/abortion-rights-activists-brace-for-new-wave-of-restrictions/

“Voters rely on you to stay true to your word, and everything that I’m campaigning on, that’s what I’ll do when I get to Congress,” said Deb Haaland, who would be the first Native American woman elected to Congress if she wins in November. “You have to be courageous.”

When asked generally about whether the Democratic Party should compromise on reproductive rights, Deb Haaland, a Democratic candidate running to represent New Mexico’s 1st Congressional District in the U.S. Congress, told Rewire.News, “absolutely not.”
Netroots Nation / Facebook

Progressives can win office and policy goals when they stick to their values—including protecting reproductive rights. That was the message shared by many activists, organizers, and candidates who convened for the annual progressive summit Netroots Nation in New Orleans last week.

New York gubernatorial candidate Cynthia Nixon touched on the theme in her keynote speech on Friday. “I’m tired of a Democratic establishment that warns candidates not to run on single-payer health care, and tells us to stop talking about abolishing ICE because it doesn’t poll well. The same Democratic establishment that once told us not to talk about civil rights, or same-sex marriage, or abortion, or a $15 minimum wage,” she continued, going on to suggest that her campaign had pushed incumbent Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo further to the left on issues like marijuana policy and teacher evaluations.

A panel the day prior moderated by #VoteProChoice co-founder and CEO Heidi Sieck went even further, specifically addressing abortion as a Democratic litmus test and the panelists’ belief that “for too long the Democratic Party has been compromising on reproductive freedom.”

The topic has caused visible conflict among Democrats coming to a head last year when Omaha mayoral candidate Heath Mello, who had cast anti-choice votes as a state legislator, was slated to speak alongside high-ranking party members at a rally. Rep. Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, has maintained there should be no litmus test on abortion for candidates.

When asked generally about whether the Democratic Party should compromise on reproductive rights, Deb Haaland, a Democratic candidate running to represent New Mexico’s 1st Congressional District in the U.S. Congress, told Rewire.News, “absolutely not.”

“Abortion is legal in this country. It’s legal, and that is the baseline,” said Haaland, who would be the first Native American woman elected to Congress if she wins in November. “We can’t go backward on that. I’ll always fight for that. Women have died, and that can happen again.”

“I’ll never sacrifice any of my values,” Haaland said when asked about whether Democrats should moderate their stances to appeal to more voters. “Voters rely on you to stay true to your word, and everything that I’m campaigning on, that’s what I’ll do when I get to Congress …. You have to be courageous.”

Reproductive rights as an issue is “solidly progressive,” according to Marvin Randolph, president of the Southern Elections Fund and Onyx Communications.

When it comes to whether the party should work to appeal to anti-choice voters, Randolph told Rewire.News doing so would be “a big mistake.”

“That’s one issue that is an absolute deal-breaker,” he said. “When you try to expand your tent where you include just everybody, at some point you lose your voice with who you are.”

While he later noted that he thought there would always be “candidates in some districts, in some place, that may take a different position on the issue” to oppose abortion, and that it was something that “voters and the party have to sort … out,” speaking more generally about the party’s beliefs Randolph said that the issue was a core Democratic value.

“As a platform, as a fundamental, ‘This is what being a progressive and a Democrat is about,’ that is territory we should not cede,” Randolph continued. “I would challenge anyone that says that to say, ‘Well does the Republican Party see their position the opposite [way]? Never. When their candidates get into office, they hold their feet to the fire on that. They don’t wait a second, they don’t wait a minute. They don’t want to wait zero seconds and they are unflinching—and we need to be too.”

Democrat’s 2016 national platform did include an explicit commitment to protecting abortion rights and, for the first time, to repealing restrictions on federal funding for abortion care.

Erica Sackin, director of political communications at Planned Parenthood, told Rewire.News that while the reproductive health organization is nonpartisan, “what you can say is that right now we’re seeing a movement across the country of women and of people galvanized around women’s health and women’s rights.”

When it comes to whether Democrats need to change their stances to appeal to more moderate voters, she noted that “people are really hungry for people who will be champions for them.”

“Alabama is a great example,” Sackin continued. “Roy Moore was absolutely a terrifying candidate, and he thought that he could win by saying that he was anti-abortion and by trying to leverage the fact that Doug Jones is unabashedly pro-choice against him. And what you saw is that it didn’t work. You saw Doug Jones’ base galvanized by him being supportive of access to abortion and access to reproductive health.”

“I think that right now we’re seeing this moment where people are really hungry for people who will stand up and fight for them, and that’s being reflected in the activism that you’re seeing but also the new candidates who are running for office,” she said.

Sackin said that she was seeing some of that energy at Netroots this year, and it had been a theme at the summit. “People who are not just organizing their communities, but running for office as first-time candidates and really not shying away from talking about the rights that affect people, including reproductive rights,” she said.

Source: https://rewire.news/article/2018/08/06/dispatch-from-netroots-you-dont-need-to-compromise-on-abortion-to-win-progressives-say/