jump to navigation

Dan Savage at the Village Voice Explains Why Electing Casey Would Hurt The Pro-Life Movement June 29, 2006

Posted by papundit in Uncategorized.

Dan Savage at the Village Voice tells a pro-choice Democrat why he should vote for Casey. Anyone who is pro-life should read this to understand why the “abortion-on-demand” party would nominate someone with nominally pro-life views. Answer: they think it is their best chance to unseat Santorum and derail the pro-life movement.

Here is Savage’s column:

Q. I’m a Pennsylvania voter and I, too, am appalled at what Senator Rick Santorum represents in the U.S. Senate. However, before jumping on the Bob Casey bandwagon, please note that Casey is also anti-choice. The conscientious Pennsylvania voter is thus faced with a profound lack of alternatives. On balance, Casey is better than Santorum, but far from a desirable candidate. —Queasy Undecided in Pennsylvania

A. Yes, Bob Casey is opposed to abortion. But by electing him we’d take out Rick “Frothy Mix” Santorum, a much more rabidly anti-choice senator. Frothy Mix doesn’t think you should be able to choose masturbation, for crying out loud. Moreover, electing Casey could help Democrats take back the Senate, which will go a long way toward protecting choice, abortion rights, and other sexual freedoms— despite Casey’s stance on choice. So casting a vote for Casey or sending a contribution to Casey is a pragmatic, progressive, pro-choice bank shot. Electing one or two pro-life Dems is the price we’ll have to pay to put reliably pro-choice Dems in positions of power all over the Senate. And speaking of the ITMFA funds, people wrote in with tons of great suggestions for where the next ITMFA check should go, from Russ Feingold to Kinky Friedman to Jon Tester to Americans United for Separation of Church and State. But I’m going to go with Planned Parenthood. Not only is Planned Parenthood a kickass group, but giving a chunk of dough to the pro-choicers at Planned Parenthood neatly balances out, karma-wise, the donation I’ve already made to Casey.

Remember this the next time you read a newspaper article saying that Casey is going to split the pro-life vote. Think about this the next time you hear on the news/radio that pro-lifers don’t need to turn out in November because both candidates oppose abortion. And tell your friends. The Democrats nominated Casey in order to appeal to pro-life and religious voters– not because they respect such beliefs. If you’re still undecided, consider the fact that Kate Michelman from NARAL endorsed Casey.



1. papundit - June 29, 2006

http://timchapmanblog.com/?p=873 has a post that supports my position on this issue. TimChapman writes:
“So why is the party embracing Bob Casey, Jr.? Have the liberals who run the show in Washington, DC seen the light? I doubt that. I would argue that Democrats today are even more stringent in theirinsistencee that Democrats toe the party line on abortion…but they have learned to put a pretty face on thatinsistencee.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid is pro-life and there are others in Congress who are as well. Democrats will insist that having these token members means they have become more accepting of other view points, but they will never be accepting of a Democrat who seeks to advance that view point. “Believe what you want, but don’t dare act on it,” has become the party mantra.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: