We can all help to reduce Abortion numbers in America by Electing Democrats

“Our respect, in society, for the “Rule of Law” is what gives the U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights true validation and power”
Marshall Adame

The abortion issue is the favorite subject of almost no American politician. The argument is endless because in a country where many very different people, of varied belief systems live together, the differences between them and the various interpretation of principle becomes the root of continual disagreement and turmoil, both public and private.

I believe that the American people are greater than our differences however serious, or great in the realm of politics, spirituality, or social injustice.
No subject highlights this gulf separating many of us from each other greater than the issue of abortion.

The left and right extremes from both political spectrums have convinced much of America that each is right and there is no opinion, other than their own, that is valid or worthy of consideration. Even common sense does not prevail.

One extreme side of the spectrum believes an abortion is an abortion at any stage of pregnancy, including up to eight months and even up to delivery. The idea of this happening has even caused legislation to be proposed to prevent “Late Term Abortion”, commonly referred to as “Partial Birth Abortion”. This extreme group believes so strongly in a woman’s “right” to choose that it should apply right up to the moment prior to the baby having the ability to exit the womb, or otherwise survive independently. (Ironically, this group opposes the death penalty, by and large, in society).

The other extreme side of the spectrum believes that all life, even unborn, is sacred and even trying to prevent a pregnancy from occurring is tantamount to murder. (Ironically this group strongly supports the death penalty in society, by and large).

In all probability, most Americans really, fully do not buy into either of these extreme belief systems and, for the most part, find both extremes indefensible even when discussed in their respective venues. These Americans, which I refer to as “most” Americans, are rarely heard over the clamor of the two extreme groups.

In the Roe vs. Wade decision of 1973 the United States Supreme court ruled that abortion was a woman’s constitutional right and therefore protected in America.
The right to an abortion became the “Law of the Land” in the United States of America. Not all laws in a civilized country are popular to most, or welcomed by large segments of the population, so that is not the point I will be making or the issue I am discussing. Please do not make this the issue, but please read on.

Those who believe in practicing abortion defend the ruling as a civil and human rights issue. Those who oppose the practice of abortion also consider it a human rights issue, the unborn child’s (Fetus). They also argue, it is not legal for anyone in America to decide to discard, through legal surgery, any unwanted appendage without medical necessity; so why a fetus (baby). None of us in America has a real “right” to choose. They also point to the fact that the word “choose” has the connotation to “choose not to do something as well, therefore all informational avenues to assist in the “choosing” should be available in society

The practice defined as “abortion”, as covered in the Supreme Court ruling, has expanded itself to include a practice of greater controversial impact which allows pregnancy to continue, nine months in some cases, and then terminating the life as it exits the womb (Partial Birth Abortion). The very idea of which, to most people in the world, seems unthinkable. Maybe even to most people who supported Roe vs. Wade in 1973 because, “partial birth abortion” did not exist then and many, in all probability, may have been opposed to it even then. It evolved as the expansion of the abortion industry in America evolved. CDC figures I read reported in 2006 says about 88% of all abortions take place in the first Trimester of pregnancy. Since the Roe vs. Wade ruling in 1973, over sixty million abortions have occurred in America. Partial Birth Abortion represents less than 1% of all abortions performed in America. That being the case, it seems that common sense would dictate that it is actually a separate issue altogether. Common sense rarely prevails these days.

Abortion is legal. Our Supreme Court has ruled it constitutionally protected. It is The Law of the Land.

In any civilized society, where Rule of Law is respected, citizens agree to disagree in accordance with the law of the land as defined by an appointed supreme advocate (The U.S. Supreme Court). The acceptance of Rule of Law , by all of us in America, has been a shining example of what a civilization can accomplish even though great parts of it’s population in civil society disagree on a litany of issues that effect their daily lives, beliefs and day to day existence as a people and as a nation.

Our respect, in society, for “Rule of Law”, is what gives the U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights true validation and power.

Why do some women get abortions? I mean other than the reasons most often propounded, i.e., rape, incest, and endangering the physical life of the mother. (The three reasons which, statistically, actually very rarely are ever declared).

In the real world, most abortions happen for very real reasons, i.e., low income, lack of pre-natal, post-natal and ongoing healthcare, poverty, ignorance, fear, illiteracy, absent social services and child care, social stigma, no family structure, or support base, and family pressures. For many people, whether they are old, poor, mighty, lowly, or rich, the world can be a scary and lonely place. I believe we have no right to stand in judgment at any level. Sometimes choosing can be a matter of life, or death in a society which frowns on the poor and expects from them, that which they cannot give. I do not like to propagate my own feeling that, in many cases, society victimizes the poor, but actually it does. For many groups in society today, the cries of victimization ring hollow, but not in this case I feel.

Whatever the reasons for having an abortion, it is my personal opinion that, in all probability, most women who have had, or will have, abortions would have, or will have considered carefully whether or not to follow through with terminating their pregnancy had they had, or will have in the future, more access, information, assistance, social understanding and support regarding the welfare of the baby being born.

In essence, family planning should address the entire spectrum of social, civil, medical, and other services and assistance available to any woman who may be pregnant in America. Society must express value in the mother’s future and well being as well as her child’s. Women considering having an abortion are worthy of societies efforts to assist them in the critical decision to abort or not to abort. Although legal and acceptable in society, I think most people, liberal and conservative alike would consider fewer abortions a good thing. Who would say “The more abortions the better”? Nobody I think. (well maybe those in the abortion industry).

Is the unborn fetus (baby) a potential citizen? Yes. Is the baby (fetus) a potential taxpayer? Yes. Should the woman carrying the potential citizen be afforded every opportunity to make an educated and rational decision regarding whether to terminate or not? Should society at large, through our private foundations and government assistance agencies, in an effort to preserve a population base which will ensure viable support and continuation of our tax and consumer base, encourage the increase of the American birth rate into the future? I think so. That can only happen if society places value on the potential of the woman carrying the baby (fetus) as well as the potential in the fetus (baby) and its future. To a great extent, society today does not extend its hand, its hope or its resources to the unborn baby (fetus), or to the woman carrying the baby (fetus).

Of the two social and political extremes, previously mentioned, only one formally emphasizes a real interest in preserving unborn life, for life’s sake, stating that, “all life is sacred”. Incredibly, it is the same group, or political persuasion (Republican-Conservative), who resist all social efforts to embrace, support, integrate or secure the civil and social circumstances which could afford the potential citizen (the baby fetus) the ability to reach his/her fullest potential as a productive and contributing human being (citizen).

Personally, I sometimes feel conservatives are excluding poor people when stating their opposition to abortion. Extreme Conservatives, in their own actions to prevent poverty and health care programs are actually encouraging the poor to have abortions.

Consequently, the conservative political movements in America, often represented by/as the Republican Party, through their policies and practice, as conducted in the social and political realm, contribute to and are therefore as culpable as any other segment of society for the high numbers of abortions today in America. Sometimes, in America today, women sincerely believe they have no real choice.

We often refer to abortion rights as “a woman’s right to choose”. That is actually a misnomer. Most of the time, the woman feels she may have no choice at all. She may perceive society has left her no choice.

Throughout America everyday women, from all walks of life, will have their own pregnancy terminated. Some of those women will be practicing Christians and women of other faiths who fundamentally do not believe that abortion is a good or moral choice to make. Many strongly feeling that they had no choice but to terminate their pregnancy.

The reality and pressure of society, many times, leaves them with what they believe is no choice. Not all women fall into this circumstance but, the point is, the decision to terminate a pregnancy probably is rarely painless or simple as many may believe. I am sure many conservative women have terminated their pregnancy with great pain and anguish as with many liberal thinking women who felt no other choice as well. Desperation has no political, religious or social allies.

Today, abortion is a fact of life, well integrated into our society and social norms in America. It has been historically accepted and free of stigma, in society at large.
Family, personal, religious and political effects are another thing altogether.

I feel, given the appropriate, meaningful alternatives, a great number of abortions taking place today for lack of real social alternatives, would be reduced. Yes, I do acknowledge that there are those who will have abortions as a means of birth control. I am not actually addressing them in this article. I am addressing the reduction of abortion numbers, not the elimination of abortion. In any case, the person who seeks an abortion without wanting to know the alternatives available through social programs is not normally wanting to have that knowledge and would have the abortion regardless, which is her right.

Indeed we live in a complicated world today. The extreme part of the conservative movement rejects abortion on moral and religious grounds while accepting and even promoting the death penalty in society on the very same grounds. They declare their belief that all life, even unborn, is sacred and must be preserved at all cost, yet have, with great energy, defended the death penalty throughout American Society.
They reject the notion of expanded social programs for the poor, which will almost certainly cause a greater number of abortions in that group of the population, but willingly and eagerly promote the funding of larger prisons and expanding the practice of “humane” executions for prisoners throughout America.

The extreme part of the liberal movement, on the other hand, promotes the curtailment of personal liberties and rights in the name of “equality”. They have almost succeeded in ushering a political correctness regime in society which would make it illegal to even offend another person, or part of society. The right would actually be the offended party’s because he/she would have the “right” to NOT be offended.

In a “free” society, there are just some things which cannot be restricted. There are some elements of the liberal movement which are not content that one might simply agree to disagree with them. Disagreement then makes any opposing element subject to labels like fascist or phobic.

In many cases it would seem the extreme liberal movement, (not the Progressive community generally), when talking about equality, seem to actually mean “their” equality as opposed to the equality of any other segment of society. Standing in judgment from their extreme liberal ivory towers, on anyone who says they do not support abortion, they proclaim them as fascist woman haters who seek to subjugate women into second class status. From their perspective, any person who simply acknowledges the right for a woman to choose, but states a personal view opposing abortion, is really a secret fascist woman hater. Nothing could be further from the truth. Fortunately most of America finally started catching on to that tactic. Consequently the political correctness movement has lost some of its steam, but remains alive and well. And that’s okay in America. It is their right.

The point I have been making is that within the realms of the two political extremes influencing the American political landscape, common sense often cannot prevail, or even be heard.

The Democratic leadership in America represents that common sense so greatly needed in America today. Contrary to “conservative” talking points, the Democratic wave of new leaders seeking office, and already in the U.S. Congress, are pragmatic and realistic thinkers who are bound by no group’s extreme agenda for America. A new Democratic President will work with the U.S. Congress and State Governors on development and structure of governments’ role in serving the American public.

A new Democratic President, having been elected in 2008 will lead the way in the promotion and structure of social assistance and health care systems which will be readily available to support, educate and provide the types of important services to American citizens which are compatible and supportive with an America where its citizens have security, peace of mind and a real opportunity to focus on the productive, creative, dynamic and industrious pursuits which will keep America strong, healthy and competitive in the world, and free.

The Republican party, the conservative movement, liberals and most plain people believe that although abortion is indeed a woman’s right, less women deciding to have abortions throughout America would represent progress in America.

It is my hope that, some day, the abortion issue in America will not be a “them” and “us” issue. While the right and left politicos are pushing and pulling thousands of people, mostly poor, are anguishing over decisions that they should not suffer to make. Abortion shouldn’t be a Christian, or not issue. It is not a liberal or conservative issue. At the end of the day, for the people experiencing this procedure, and for those who struggle to simply understand it, it is a very human experience. The Progressive Democrats in office and being elected to office seek to mitigate the issue through the substantive work and programs that will provide real hope for the poor and others in society who may discern the need to decide this issue for themselves. Life can really slam people sometimes and the Progressive Democrats recognize that.

Republican politics of fear and mayhem have prevented the U.S. and State governments from implementing programs which could have provided “real choice” to many women who felt the necessity to have abortions where, from their perspective, there was no choice. With a Democratic President, a woman will have the right and real chance “to choose”. I believe that in many cases, where the circumstances have improved for the poor, or desperate in America, many of those choices will be to forgo abortion in favor of life.

Let’s give America a real choice for its future. Let us have the courage and audacity, in the face of the major and extreme political movements in America today, and vote Democrats into Congress and into the White House. We have the right to choose that.

In 1776 We The People choose to be an independent nation, wherein the rights of the “individual” were cherished and preserved above the rights of the government. In doing so, preserving the “liberty of the free individual” became preeminent. The freedom to choose is in our nature as Americans.

I love my country. I love it's people.

Marshall is a retired US Marine Vietnam veteran who became an aviation management/logistics consultant in 1992.

He worked in the Kuwait recovery of 1992-93 and was the senior aviation logistics manager for Kaman Aerospace in their Egypt US Government Aviation assistance programs from 1998 through 2002.

Marshall arrived in Iraq in 2003 where he was the Coalition Provincial Authority Airport Director for Basrah International Airport,
He was later VP for Aviation development in Iraq with an International commercial company.
Marshall received a Diplomatic appointment by the Department of State (DoS) and was assigned as a US Advisor for logistics to the Iraqi Ministry of Interior.

He later joined the DoS Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRT) where he served on staff of the National Coordination Team (NCT) in the Embassy in Baghdad, Iraq. (Logistics, City planning, Governance Capacity Building, Government Liaison).

Marshall is currently serving as the Sr. Analyst for a Defense contractor.

Marshall, 54, and his wife Becky (Formerly Becky Ortiz), a 3rd grade teacher, have been married for 37 years and have four children, Paul, Veronica, William and Benjamin, and eleven grandchildren.

Two of their sons, William and Benjamin, have served in Iraq in the US Army. William was wounded in action on July 2nd 2006.

Marshall and Becky reside in Jacksonville North Carolina.

Marshall Adame is a 2008 candidate for the North Carolina 3rd US Congressional District seat and is a strong supporter of John Edwards for President of The United States in 2008.


I'm at work

and don't have time to dig deeply into this post and give it the time it deserves.

I applaud you for taking it on, head on, and stating your opinion. I will read it more deeply later, and comment, I'm sure.


"Be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi

Two things

We need to stress that 98% of Elected Democrats are completely against partial-birth abortion. We think it's a horrible thing. We don't think it should be elective. And every Democrat I know would gladly vote to ban it as long as there is an exception for the life of the mother.

I guess number two is that if you plan on using that, it's not clear enough how Democratic policies, by raising prosperity across the board, lower abortion numbers ... like the Clinton Presidency did.

I always wanted to be the avenging cowboy hero—that lone voice in the wilderness, fighting corruption and evil wherever I found it, and standing for freedom, truth and justice. - Bill Hicks

Hi Sam,......

I am afraid that my approach to these issues are not as scientific, or modular as yours.

I do intellectualize soime things, and others I write what I personally feel.

To many, this is a very, very personal issue. I do not know, or in this case, want to know how to intellectualize this issue.

I read the stuff you write and I admire your ability to articulate an issue in it's clinical perspective and scope.

Maybe you will be helping me to do this later. I appreciate your taking the time to remark on something I have written.

Marshall Adame
2014 U.S. Congress Candidate NC-03

It's Always Seemed So Simple to Me

If you don't like abortion - don't get one.

I won't try to make you have one - why do you tell me that I can't?

I wish no one ever had to but that's not reality.

An abortion in a medical facility is much preferable to a coat hangar and Drano.

This got

some people riled up at kos. I think the lesson is that there might not be anyone who says "Abortion is good" but some people come really close. There were some comments that, frankly, pissed me off.

Draft Brad Miller -- NC Sen ActBlue :::Petition

"Keep the Faith"

Hi Blue S......Riling them up was not the intention...

Most who were a little pressed most certainaly did not read the whole thing or only focused on what they wanted to.
That article came directly from my own perspective. I do realize I take risks, being a candidate, writing on something as uncomfortable as Abortion, but really, I want to be out there. Later, it is going to be very important to me for people to decide if they will support my candidacy. I am just taking the risk, knowing many may be a little pushed by my words. My intent is pure. My agenda is the Democratic Party and getting America back on its road to greatness..

Marshall Adame
2014 U.S. Congress Candidate NC-03

Why Should People Get Pissed?

It's an individual decision, not a collective decision.

Some people would make it that way but it really isn't.

Marshall, meet the reactionaries...

Reactionaries, meet Marshall.

The majority of the Kossacks missed the boat on Marshall's post.

Marshall's intention (and stop me if I'm wrong here...) is that a Democratic government can reduce the number of abortions by correcting many government policies (pushed by Republican-Conservative-Free market types) which increase poverty, decrease effective education and family planning, and generally give many women that become pregnant lack of good alternatives to abortion.

He has no anti-abortion agenda. The right to have an abortion is Constitutionally granted. It's the "law of the land."

Many of the Kossacks saw "abortion" and "reduce" and wrongly came up with an anti-abortion meme. Perhaps, if they had asked questions about Marshall's intentions, they would've figured that out.

Of course, it's easier to attack that which you don't agree instead of talking out the issue.

Disclaimer: *I am a supporter of Marshall Adame's bid for North Carolina's 3rd Congressional District.*

Thomas S. Brock


What have YOU done today to make the world a better place?

I was angry enough to Diary on Kos about it

I always wanted to be the avenging cowboy hero—that lone voice in the wilderness, fighting corruption and evil wherever I found it, and standing for freedom, truth and justice. - Bill Hicks

Who's Reactionary?


I agree with Marshall.

No no no

I was angry at the reactionaries ... M.A. got a lot of flames.

I always wanted to be the avenging cowboy hero—that lone voice in the wilderness, fighting corruption and evil wherever I found it, and standing for freedom, truth and justice. - Bill Hicks

jerkin' yer chain, sam

I didn't see any flames here (or even smell smoke for that matter)

tsk. so polite here. makes an old woman proud {snif}

I just wish you hadn't brought up partial birth abortion

I think many would agree with me that the whole flap and subsequent legislation on partial birth abortion was a red herring created by Republicans as a wedge. It's very very very hard to believe that a woman is just making some flippant choice about terminating during delivery. And the statistics---less than 1% of all abortions---most surely bear this out.

But Republicans couldn't even get their red herring law done without making it unconstitutional, because they don't care about people's right to their own health. They want to slowly but surely erode reproductive rights--much like with parental consent laws, laws regarding which trimesters it can be done, etc.

And they prove it again with the stem cell debate. They'd rather see tens of thousands of blastocysts created in the fertility clinics thrown in the trash than see them used for better health in this country. All in the name of God, which makes it even worse. As a person living with chronic illness, I find their extremism too offensive for words most of the time. They defend these blastocysts as babies and snowflakes, while tens of thousands of them get thrown in the trash. We are literally thowing away potential cures in this country. It boggles the mind.

So, I agree a thousand times over with your larger point, that Democratic poliicies surely bring down the number of abortions by the vast network of social programs we not only endorse, but we created! Great, great point.
But I don't think that my pro-choice position represents an extreme position on the spectrum. When you say that there's a spectrum on the issue, you're playing on a Republican playing field. You either believe women have control over their own health, or you believe in protecting the unborn and biotrash over the living. You tell me which view is extreme. . .

War is over if you want it.

The commonality of the two extremes....

The commonality of the two extremes is that both are divisive in society, both can hurt the humanbeing making the decision and the potential humanbeing the decision will impact.

Both use thier position for political leverage and gain. In the end, both extremes, as most extremes do, harm society and perpetuate the gulfs which divide us all.

We are a civilized people. We must come to terms, or at least try, with our differences, our methods, goals and visions and integrate those differences into our way of life.

In a Democracy nobody gets to stand on the mountain top alone. At least I hope not.

The two extremes have a great deal in common in that neither pushes us forward as a society or as a Nation.

Both extremes make us realize the great value of compromise, not in our personal beliefs, but in the society where we all live and work together to achieve many common goals.

Reason should prevail in a Democracy, as the one we cherish in America.

Americans are more the same than we are different.

I appreciate you comments. I mean it. I learn something here every day.

Marshall Adame
2014 U.S. Congress Candidate NC-03

I'm glad you did bring up partial birth abortions.

The flame-tastic comments at Kos show how difficult the discussion is. But difficult discussions are just the ones we need to have in this state, and in this country.

The candidate who has the cajones to address the issue before the question is asked, has taken, in my view, three giant steps forward. I am by no means a one issue voter, but hearing the stand that a candidate has on abortion, and how he or she states it, when he or she states it is important to me.

I think defining this as "Republican Playing Field" is giving up the issue to them completely, and we can't do that.. They don't own "values", and they don't own "family issues".

That's been our problem for the past 20 years - letting them think they get to define what the issue is. They don't get to do all of the defining, all of the framing. Better sex education in schools where children are, accessibility to birth control, strong educational programs to allow individuals and entire families pull themselves out of poverty, affordable housing, affordable child care, affordable transportation - all of those things will help reduce the abortion rate.

I believe that the Democratic party is big enough to include those who are opposed to all abortion, for whatever reason.

Marshall, for what it's worth, I wouldn't say this:

Abortion shouldn’t be a Christian, or not issue.

For many devout Catholics and other Christians, it is, and always will be a matter tied so closely to their faith that they cannot separate it. The points you make that are strong and should be honed and pinpointed are:

It is not a liberal or conservative issue. At the end of the day, for the people experiencing this procedure, and for those who struggle to simply understand it, it is a very human experience.

Indeed. A very human - and heartwrending - experience. When I was a senior in college, I chose to have a first trimester abortion. I am from an upper-middle class family; money and a home, medical, all of that wouldn't have been a problem, but finishing school at the extremely conservative school I went to (can you believe it, y'all?) would have been impossible. At the time, I thought it was the only choice I had. I don't regret the decision, but not a day goes by that I don't wonder "what if...".

The main thing that won me, Marshall, that made me say, ok, here's another one I'd vote for if I had a chance was:

Republican politics of fear and mayhem have prevented the U.S. and State governments from implementing programs which could have provided “real choice” to many women who felt the necessity to have abortions where, from their perspective, there was no choice. With a Democratic President, a woman will have the right and real chance “to choose”. I believe that in many cases, where the circumstances have improved for the poor, or desperate in America, many of those choices will be to forgo abortion in favor of life.

Let’s give America a real choice for its future. Let us have the courage and audacity, in the face of the major and extreme political movements in America today, and vote Democrats into Congress and into the White House. We have the right to choose that.

Do you have any friends in District 06 you might be able to convince to run? :)

"Be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi

I think abortion should be safe, legal and rare.

I think there is a spectrum on this issue. It is not a choice between "abortion on demand" and "abortion is murder" - there are a lot of positions in between. I believe the Supreme Court decision in Roe vs. Wade divided pregnancy into trimesters, allowing more restrictions in the second and even more in the third trimester. It is obviously not perfect, but it was and is a reasonable way to address the issue.

Partial birth abortion is not a medical term, it is a phrase made up by the anti-abortionists because "dilation and extraction" sounds too clinical, not incendiary enough. There are occasions where the procedure is necessary to the life and health of the mother. The anti-abortionists say it is never necessary, because the C-section is always available. A couple of cases where D&X is appropriate are:

1. The fetus is already dead. That's right, if the fetus dies and the mother does not go into labor, then the fetus has to be removed or the mother will also die. Should that be done by C-section when D&X is so much safer for the mother?

2. The fetus has advanced hydrocephalus. Mild cases can be treated, but severe cases cannot. In a severe case of hydrocephalus, the fetus's head may measure 50 centimeters in diameter and contain up to 2 gallons of fluid. 50 centimeters is about 20 inches; the average adult head is 6 to 7 inches in diameter. This baby cannot be born by vaginal birth. If the baby is taken by C-section, it will live only a few hours. Imagine the size of the incision, and the risk to the mother's life and health. So please don't buy the argument that so-called "partial-birth abortion" is never necessary.

What about the case where the mother decides, late in pregnancy, that she cannot take care of this baby and wants to have an abortion? I suggest in that case she consider adoption instead.

Now, back to Marshall's original point: I certainly agree that electing Democrats is the best way to reduce the number of abortions that take place. Because Democrats address the root problems that contribute to unwanted pregnancies, and that make people feel they cannot care for a baby.

The advise I get here is priceless...

because it is coming from people who's only motivation is to help society in one way or another. Although we, here in BlueNC, have many common goals as Democrats and others, we also share our differences here and are able to conduct discourse regarding those differences without the divisiveness so often found in many other blogging enviourments. There is much to say about civility in America today.

I probably deserve the harsh criticizems as much , or more than the kudos, but I learn from both.

I try never to consider my opinion as the "only" right one or "true", or "enlightened one". I just consider my opinion as "another amoung many". In that way I actually "hear" the others.

Thank you very much for the kind things you have said about my writings and about me as a candidate.

Marshall Adame
2014 U.S. Congress Candidate NC-03

A side effect, not a solution.


First, it was not helpful that when you mentioned the extremes of the debate, you used the language of right wing rhetoric. No one endorses elective late term abortions. Only 1.2% of abortions happen after 20 weeks. It's not pro-abortion vs. pro-life, it is pro-choice vs. pro-life. It is as if you characterized the debate over Iraq as being between the extremes of some who want to win in Iraq, and some who want to let all of our soldiers die there. It's borderline dishonest.

But your outline of the debate wasn't really central to your argument, which I see as:

-poverty is a prime factor in choosing to have an abortion.
-electing Democratic leadership will result in poverty-reducing policy.
therefore, electing Democrats will reduce abortion rates.

Your argument that poverty is a prime factor in abortions is unsupported. While this may reflect some common sense reasoning about the situations and motivations of poor people, it's not as cut and dried. In 1994, half of all abortions were performed on women with family incomes above $30k/yr. In 2000, it was closer to 44%. The other statistic is that the rate for women under the poverty line is 44 per thousand, but for more than 300% of the poverty line it was 10 per thousand. So poor women are four times as likely to have an abortion as well-off women. The interesting thing about that statistic is that women under the poverty line are twice as likely to be pregnant as the 300%ers.

What that says to me is that this is an access to healthcare issue. Poverty is secondary as it decreases access to contraception and the ability to afford a child. If there's less poverty, some unwanted pregnancies may become accidental pregnancies. That's a side effect, not an answer. The answer is prevention; fix healthcare, increase access to contraception and prevent unwanted pregnancies.

Here's an easy statistics sheet: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html


Thanks for reading the article..but...

You may have mischaracterized my intent...You are mistaken if you feel that I am saying poverty causes abortions. I was born into poverty myself, and I can assure you, in that community, when an abortion did occur, it was not poverty that decided the action. Fear often trumped there.

Poverty, or being in poverty, is of course an element which contributes to the numbers of abortions in America, but actually it goes much deeper into the psyche, in my view.

We, as a people, have fosterd the idea that the poor and disadvantaged have less value in society as those not poor, or disadvataged.

It is my sincere belief that a people, a society, are judged by how they treat and consider the poor and disadvantaged who are a part of them.

There is more than a process, a law or movement that is effecting us. It may not be as black and white as you would suppose, i.e., "poverty equals more abortions", no , not at all.

In the past six years, an attitude of supposition and judgment has entered our politics. While cloaking itself in the robes of "what is right and pure", it actually allocates blame and a certain level of unworthiness, for lack of ambition, drive, or a desire to achieve. All of which are false, and even malicious atributions upon certain elements of society which the right wing of government and society have determined unworthy of our attention and care.

That attitude in our government and in certain parts of society have fostered the enviorment wherein denying certain assistance to other parts of society is fully justified based on specfic, class related, atributions.

Today, certain , less represented elements of our population, whos voices are seldom heard, really do need representatives who will unashamedly champion their cause and their right to benefit, progress, produce and prosper as other segments also do.

We, in America, to some extent, for we are truly a compassionate people, could use a change of heart.

Things are not always as black and white as we may like to see them. It often goes beyond the statistics.

Marshall Adame
2014 U.S. Congress Candidate NC-03

If I have you wrong, by all means correct me.

In reading the comments here and at kos, it seems you respond to criticism with "you misunderstand me" and then make no effort to clarify your point or your argument.

Could you please?


I did not say you misunderstood me Barret...

I said you mischaracterized my meaning by suggesting that all I was saying is that poverty caused abortions. I did not say that. It is a part of a much bigger picture which I hope I did explain already.

Marshall Adame
2014 U.S. Congress Candidate NC-03

I, like the others. . .

Appreciate your leadership on this AND your willingness to take it on without being asked. That is too rare in politics today, and I can tell you are a very thoughtful person who leads with his mind instead of his "gut."

My only quibble---and I wrote too much in my earlier comment, which must have come off as pretty dramatic---is that I don't think my position that a woman always have the right to her own reproductive choices to protect her own health is any more extreme than me having the right to protect my own health. I'm just saying you shouldn't go chasing GOP windmills. I also agree it's an access to healthcare and sex ed issue, too.

I'll leave it at that, because I agree with you 100% on the issue--just didn't want to be characterized as an extremist because I want my wife and sisters to be able to have their lives protected no matter what.

I'd love to hear how you feel about stem cells.

War is over if you want it.


Regarding your comment,

"I'll leave it at that, because I agree with you 100% on the issue--just didn't want to be characterized as an extremist because I want my wife and sisters to be able to have their lives protected no matter what"

My friend, when it comes to protecting the safety, health and welfare of my family, you will find no greater extremist than I.

I do very much appreciate your comments.

"Thinkers have never ruled the world, but they have made it much better for us all to live in".

Marshall Adame

Marshall Adame
2014 U.S. Congress Candidate NC-03

This is why you'd make a good congressman

It's always offended me that the men in Congress (let's face it, the vast majority are men) try to make decisions in this arena of political thought WITHOUT considering the health, safety, and welfare of the women in their lives and their constituencies. To carry some notion to it's ideological conclusion without doing this is insane.

Thanks for your leadership on this issue.

War is over if you want it.