Recently, there was a great editorial in the Economist regarding abortion. The Economist suggests that the Democratic party is making a mistake by clinging to abortion as a central platform. Instead, they should drop the issue, and let it be solved by a public referendums or the like. Since the public is by majority supportive of abortion rights, such a popular vote would not result in abortion bans, except maybe partial-birth abortions. A choice quote from the article:
Relying on judges to advance the liberal agenda allowed conservatives to seize the mantle of populism. Roe has given Republicans a free ride: they can claim to oppose abortion in the comfortable knowledge that it will never be banned. But imagine if Roe were overturned. How many Republicans would vote for a ban on abortion that only one in five Americans support?
...History is full of great generals who won their wars by staging strategic retreats. Field-Marshal Kutusov allowed Napoleon to occupy Moscow, tempting him to over-extend himself. The Democrats might emulate that aged Russian's wiliness—and stage a strategic retreat to the high ground of popular opinion.
It makes sense to me. I'm really not so worried about the success of the Democratic party here. I'm just sick and tired of the endless debate; it is devisive and going nowhere fast. Lets get a new cause, people.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment