Does anyone remember the article - @ Abortion related

[pixy0stix]

Does anyone remember the article going around a few years ago about why pro-choice shouldn't say "legal, safe, rare" and why you shouldn't be against abortion, but pro-choice? Lord, I hope this resonates with someone, cause it really changed my thinking and I want to read it again.

[hetty]

This?
www.ansirh.com/_documents/library/weitz_jwh10-2010.pdf

[pixy0stix]

May 16, 2019 20:10:35 GMT -5 hetty said:

This?
www.ansirh.com/_documents/library/weitz_jwh10-2010.pdf

If not this, then it was something very similar to this. Thank you!

[boiler717]

May 16, 2019 18:57:52 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

Does anyone remember the article going around a few years ago about why pro-choice shouldn't say "legal, safe, rare" and why you shouldn't be against abortion, but pro-choice? Lord, I hope this resonates with someone, cause it really changed my thinking and I want to read it again.

I don’t know of an article but it’s discussed in the book Pro.

[WOT?*]

Harvard politics? harvardpolitics.com/united-states/safe-legal-and-rare-the-democrats-evolving-stance-on-abortion/

Everyday Feminism? everydayfeminism.com/2014/04/problems-keep-abortion-rare/

Not the one you're looking for but The Guardian has a decent-ish article (also linking to the Weitz paper in the first response). www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/09/hillary-clinton-abortion-legal-but-rare

[redheadbaker]

This one? www.alternet.org/i-am-pro-abortion-not-just-pro-choice-10-reasons-why-we-must-support-procedure-and-choice

It sparked a pretty interesting conversation on the board: pandce.proboards.com/thread/443935/pro-abortion-choice

[WOT?*]

May 17, 2019 9:04:09 GMT -5 redheadbaker said:

This one? www.alternet.org/i-am-pro-abortion-not-just-pro-choice-10-reasons-why-we-must-support-procedure-and-choice

It sparked a pretty interesting conversation on the board: pandce.proboards.com/thread/443935/pro-abortion-choice

I remember this article. "I am pro-abortion just like I am pro knee-replacement surgery."

[pixy0stix]

May 17, 2019 9:04:09 GMT -5 redheadbaker said:

This one? www.alternet.org/i-am-pro-abortion-not-just-pro-choice-10-reasons-why-we-must-support-procedure-and-choice

It sparked a pretty interesting conversation on the board: pandce.proboards.com/thread/443935/pro-abortion-choice

This one is it.

[heyjude]

“Safe, legal, and rare” led us right into the the mouths of wolves.

[heyjude]

Boy that thread didn't age well.

The right has been playing the long game on abortion since the day Roe was announced. They have carefully laid the pieces down to get us exactly to this very moment in time, where a woman's right to choose is a heartbeat away from death.

The Democrats on the other hand played the short game. Taking for granted the extreme peril that choice was under. "Safe, Legal, and Rare" was just one aspect of their/our naive thinking on choice, used to win close elections in battleground states. Rather than focussing on how "rare" abortions should be, Democrats should have focussed on how "rare" rapes should be, how "rare" unaffordable childcare should be, how "rare" maternal mortality should be, how "rare" lack of adequate women's healthcare should be. And before anyone says, "Dems are talking about all this now," this phrase started under Clinton. And what else is Clinton famous for? Dismantling the welfare system, which largely benefited who? Women. Focussing on overall women's health and wellbeing NOW isn't good enough when we have no power and Roe is pretty much toast.

Bottom line, you can't have a conversation about the desired "rarity" of abortion when the very idea of abortion is two steps away from illegality. Unfortunately we are NOW one step away from illegality and in some states abortion is so very restricted it is actually "rare." Good job Ds! You got exactly what you wanted!