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

[Ninsianna]

149. Anti-choice refers to a political idealogy that seeks to enact laws that deny

women basic human rights and are shown to endanger their lives by driving up maternal mortality.

It's not about morality, it's about legislation.

An anti-choicer period who wins will be a vote against women's rights and women's lives. They won't be any better than a Rep and when you're willing to give on something as basic a woman's basic right to autonomy and bodily integrity, you're not to be trusted on anything else.

The issue here is that once again women are being treated as if they don't matter. If the point of contention was a Democrat who was anti-gay or pro-segregation or pro-slavery, people would be up in arms, even if the rest of the argument holds. This is the same thing, except to a more offensive degree since this is something that LITERALLY kills women. It could be said to be pro-slavery as well, since it denies human beings ownership of their own bodies.

At the end of the day anyone who can or would compromise on the human rights of women is not a D, is not to be trusted and will not receive the support of the people who make up this party and do the hard work. We're tired of being sacrificed and told we don't matter.

As a woman, I don't care what the letter is, if they're willing to vote to kill me and deny me basic human rights, they won't get my support or my vote.