This may be unpopular, but I'm ok with running anti-choice Dems if it will win elections.

[delisen]

29. Human Rights are not silly. Manchin gets to be pro-coal and

Heitcamp gets to be pro-pipeline.

Human rights are different. If we do not, as individuals, control our bodies, we are not free.

In the past the Democratic Party and people who claim to be progressive did reject human rights for certain people.

Woodrow Wilson segregated the federal workforce, denying opportunity and equal rights to African Americans.

While FDR might have been sympathetic, he was not a champion of equal rights for African-Americans. He assumed he needed the all-white solid south Dixiecrats to win elections and tailored his agenda to keep those votes.

I don't want to compromise the rights of 15% of our population or 52% in order to make winning elections easier.

I'd rather see leadership lead on human rights or pass the torch.

The fact that people are using terms like pro or anti-abortion represents a failure of leadership in framing a human rights issue.

Politically the issue is pro or anti-legal abortion; pro-choice or anti-choice.

Democratic office holders who are anti-legal abortion will be heavily recruited by Republican leaders to switch parties. I don't see the point of over-investing in them.