AHC: Weaker Pro-Abortion Movement in the US

[pattersonautobody]

This is easily doable if the pro-life side is more ruthless with their messaging and more incrementalist. Every European country I can think of allows legal abortion up to 18-20 months. This was before the science of ultrasound. I presume the time period was chosen because at that point, you start to get enough weeks in where the child is viable outside the womb. So viability outside the womb obviously equals human life, killing the individual being murder.

So, the USA prolife movement simply has to cast prochoice as extreme, like "Red China" and not "like rest of the Western world."

Now, in time, with ultrasound and what not, the prolife movement can incrementally adjust their messaging so as to wittle away at weeks.

So, the more incrementalist the pro-life view is the more less successful pro choice is. Hence, I think without butterflies the pro choice mov't in the USA can be much weaker than today.

 

[brunohusker]

I think one thing that might make it weaker is that instead of becoming a fully conservative movement, outreach to minorities is stronger and maybe you see more emphasis on how Margaret Sanger wasn’t a fan of minorities (to be fair, I’m not sure if she was a full on white supremacist, but this was told to me in Catholic high school and to be sure, she probably did agree with eugenics but even WEB DuBois thought it was good too as he felt it made the black population better. )

Maybe you even have a stronger pro life liberal movement as I think until the early 80s Jesse Jackson was pro life and maybe a stronger liberal pro life side that isn’t undermined by conservatives arguing they aren’t genuine might help.

Another thing that might weaken it is to make abortion seem like something spoiled rich people get and instead of trying for access for all, liberals instead gravitate to rich spoiled folks killing the unwanted, tying it into things like Vietnam and inner city crime where it seems such people also disregard life.

 

[kham_coc]

yeah make Roe V Wade go away.
Politically it was an idiotic ruling. Because instead of actually holding real political arguments about it, became phony and escalating, safe in the knowledge that it doesn't matter (as it's "settled" law).
I missread the challenge.

 

[Dancing Fool]

Instead of this passing at the beginning of Clinton’s second term in 1997, this passes twenty years earlier in Carter’s first year in 1977.

That way, it can honestly and accurately be pointed out that by providing subsidized health care to pregnant women and young children, we are realistically doing what we can to reduce the number of abortions.

 

[Ditzy Vixen (RossN)]

Really you need to keep Pro-Life Democrats around on an elected level. A Pro-Life Democrat as president seems very unlikely after the 1970s but you could still have a vocal and powerful Pro-Life minority.

 

[Dancing Fool]

Now, in time, with ultrasound and what not, the prolife movement can incrementally adjust their messaging so as to wittle away at weeks.

I agree.

In fact, this is near and dear to my heart. Meaning, the whole idea of, What can we do right now, and how can we bend the curve?

But—

As I’m sure we both know, many people greatly relish politics as a contact sport and like extreme positions. In fact, the way the logical “syllogism”* is taught in high school is all about categorical statements. And my one year in high school debate [way back during the Carter administration!], the topic was energy policy. And since Saturday debate tournaments were all about winning, no, it did not lend itself to middle-of-the-road problem solving.

So, good luck to both of us!

* A syllogism such as: “All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.”

 

[brunohusker]

yeah make Roe V Wade go away.
Politically it was an idiotic ruling. Because instead of actually holding real political arguments about it, became phony and escalating, safe in the knowledge that it doesn't matter (as it's "settled" law).
I missread the challenge.

I’ve heard this from even very progressive legal scholars. Not to mention that it has made people very invested in either side stuck with making bad arguments.

 

[SealTheRealDeal]

Every European country I can think of allows legal abortion up to 18-20 months.

Whose pregnancy is lasting 20 months? Are these laws for the elephants in the zoo?

 

[brunohusker]

Really you need to keep Pro-Life Democrats around on an elected level. A Pro-Life Democrat as president seems very unlikely after the 1970s but you could still have a vocal and powerful Pro-Life minority.

Maybe if for some reason Roe is delayed until Carter is elected, they might change things. Carter had said that as a devout baptist he would have never signed a bill like Reagan did in California. So you’d have a man who’s more or less pro choice in public but for limits on abortion. Granted given that the Republicans have pretty good tricksters helping them it might not matter.

Also, you’re right about how there would be no pro life democratic nominee after the 70s. Granted Sargent Shriver was on the ticket in 72. Maybe somehow getting Humphrey and Muskie elected in 68 helps. Muskie to my knowledge stayed pro life through his political career. Maybe he runs in 76 and at the very least it allows for pro life wings in both parties.

 

[pattersonautobody]

Whose pregnancy is lasting 20 months? Are these laws for the elephants in the zoo?

weeks, whoops