Secure Reproductive Rights for All

When America went to the polls and elected Barack Obama and Joe Biden as the next president and vice president of the United States, it was an historic moment. As prochoice Catholics, we celebrated the election of a prochoice president who has been a strong supporter of abortion rights, comprehensive sexuality education and access to reproductive health care.

Certainly, the next administration will have to work hard to repair the damage done to reproductive rights during the last eight years: the Global Gag Rule, abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, the subordination of science to personal, religious beliefs, and a pervasive program against family-planning efforts. Undoubtedly, concerns about America’s economic security and military engagements overseas will garner a great deal of attention. However, the next administration and congress must also work for advances in reproductive health care in the US and abroad. The priorities include:

1. Providing comprehensive and affordable health care to all Americans. This includes funding for comprehensive sex education and family planning programs that reduce unintended pregnancy and the need for abortion, as well as providing support for women who choose to carry their pregnancies to term.

2. Restoring the United States’ leadership position on women’s rights, international family planning and global development issues. This includes the restoration of the US contribution to UNFPA and the repeal of the Mexico City policy that restricts US funding for foreign NGOs that work on abortion.

3. Working towards an end to the culture wars over abortion and towards an era that respects the right of women to access legal abortion in a timely manner. To that end, we need to restore scientific integrity to federal agencies by appointing qualified personnel to leadership roles and advisory committees irrespective of their personal beliefs about abortion and contraception and by appointing judges who will uphold the long-standing precedent of Roe v. Wade.

4. Respecting the conscience of each American. The next president should remove any refusal clauses affecting federal health programs beyond the traditional exemption for the direct provision of abortion and work to make the equitable provision of reproductive-health services a priority at both the state and federal levels.

Results show that 54 percent of Catholics voted in favor of a president who shares their values on sexual and reproductive health. This shows that the majority of Catholics voted their conscience when deciding who should be the next president, and ignored the single-issue dictates of a few bishops who declared that it was unacceptable to vote for him because of his prochoice position.? Catholic voters overwhelmingly endorsed an agenda that includes access to family planning, comprehensive age-appropriate sex education and caring adoption programs in order to reduce the need for abortion.? We will count on the next administration to uphold this agenda, undo the damages of the last administration and secure reproductive rights for all.


ockraz's picture

Groups like Catholics United were arguing that Catholics should vote for Obama IN SPITE of his being pro-choice . You seem to think that the fact that a majority of Catholics voted for him (anyway) indicates that they support his position on that issue. That is utter nonsense!

ebsarver's picture

If we're talking about reproductive rights, then what about men? There are serious issues with this, and every time the topic is brought up, men are totally left out of the equation. We supply half the dna to make a kid, but have zip for rights when it comes to our kids. Choice for Men!

http://www.glennsacks.com/30_years_after.htm
http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/11.14 .96/cover/dads-9646.html

ockraz's picture

It strikes me that there are two possibilities:

a) one can believe that the right to abortion is merely a contrivance
which would imply that
men have duties to the women who get pregnant unintentionally

b) women have reproductive rights and can determine whether or not they will terminate a pregnancy
which would imply that
men would merely have a duty to pay for half of the price of an abortion if their sexual activity
resulted in a pregnancy that THEY didn't want

Paternity laws date back to a time before birth control was readily available- before abortion was legal- before DNA or even blood tests could give evidence of paternity- before women could support themselves financially

They were originally designed to help ladies (of good 'virtue'- ie, not sleeping around, else how could you bring a successful suit against one man) who were lead astray by a man (often with the assumption that he had explicitly or implicitly promised things) and were now left 'in distress' without means to provide for themselves or their child.

How are these laws not premised on pre-Roe thinking? Dosn't the Roe 'reproductive freedom' rationale amount to 'taxation without representation' for men who didn't want a pregnancy to result from sex?

faces's picture

what about men's rights when it comes to babies? Who gets to decide if mother keeps baby, or even keeps baby in mother till born? Does the father have a say whether the mother puts the baby up for adoption? Do grandparents? These are ethical debates that are right around the corner, and sometimes already right around the corner courthouse.

momof4kiddos's picture

what about the choice of the child?

Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter

OV Social

 

randomness