Facebook Pixel
Wisdom of Crowds

Is There Any Room For Compromise on Abortion?

Description

\n \n

Your browser doesn’t support HTML audio. Here is a link to the file.

\n"}]],"markups":[["em"],["strong"],["a",["href","wisdomofcrowds.live/ten-years-of-horror/"]]],"sections":[[1,"p",[[0,[],0,"This week was a first for the podcast– we welcomed two guests, Michael Wear and Jane Coaston. Michael is a rare fish, an Evangelical Christian and a Democratic political strategist who worked as President Obama's director of faith outreach in the 2012 campaign, going on to lead Evangelical outreach for the Obama White House's faith based initiative. An article he recently wrote for his Substack, \"This is How to End Abortion Politics as We've Known It,\" has sparked vigorous discussion among the online set. In it, Wear argues that what \"is needed now is legislation which provides a national framework that would contain our abortion debate, even if it would also mean codifying the nation’s long-held consensus that abortion is not a social good, even if a majority also believe it necessary to (re)establish the right to have one.\""]]],[1,"p",[[0,[],0,"Jane Coaston, a New York Times opinion writer and host of \"The Argument\" podcast, thinks that Wear is mistaken. In her view, both sides see their position as absolute, and any compromise will be seen as an unacceptable betrayal of the cause. We decided to invite them both onto the pod, to hash it out and discuss the political fallout from the "],[0,[0],1,"Dobbs "],[0,[],0,"decision. "]]],[10,0],[1,"p",[[0,[],0,"In "],[0,[1],1,"Part 2"],[0,[],0,", available "],[0,[2],1,"here"],[0,[],0," for subscribers, the conversation shifted towards a discussion of first principles and political strategy. We asked Michael how he squared working for President Obama with his own pro-life position, and questioned Jane on whether she thought a \"settlement\" on abortion was even desirable, let alone possible. "]]],[1,"p",[[0,[],0,"Will Republicans after the fall of "],[0,[0],1,"Roe v. Wade "],[0,[],0,"be like the dog who caught the car, as Damir argues? Will Democrats be forced to moderate their strategy on abortion to meet voters where they are? Will either party be able to extricate itself from the demands of its activist class? And finally, we all debate the extent to which Democrats could, or should, have moderated their views on abortion over the past decade. "]]]]}'>

This week was a first for the podcast– we welcomed two guests, Michael Wear and Jane Coaston. Michael is a rare fish, an Evangelical Christian and a Democratic political strategist who worked as President Obama's director of faith outreach in the 2012 campaign, going on to lead Evangelical outreach for the Obama White House's faith based initiative. An article he recently wrote for his Substack, "This is How to End Abortion Politics as We've Known It," has sparked vigorous discussion among the online set. In it, Wear argues that what "is needed now is legislation which provides a national framework that would contain our abortion debate, even if it would also mean codifying the nation’s long-held consensus that abortion is not a social good, even if a majority also believe it necessary to (re)establish the right to have one."

Jane Coaston, a New York Times opinion writer and host of "The Argument" podcast, thinks that Wear is mistaken. In her view, both sides see their position as absolute, and any compromise will be seen as an unacceptable betrayal of the cause. We decided to invite them both onto the pod, to hash it out and discuss the political fallout from the Dobbs decision.

In Part 2, available here for subscribers, the conversation shifted towards a discussion of first principles and political strategy. We asked Michael how he squared working for President Obama with his own pro-life position, and questioned Jane on whether she thought a "settlement" on abortion was even desirable, let alone possible.

Will Republicans after the fall of Roe v. Wade be like the dog who caught the car, as Damir argues? Will Democrats be forced to moderate their strategy on abortion to meet voters where they are? Will either party be able to extricate itself from the demands of its activist class? And finally, we all debate the extent to which Democrats could, or should, have moderated their views on abortion over the past decade.

Required Reading:

  • "This is How to End Abortion Politics as We've Known It," by Michael, on his Substack.
  • "Democrats Shouldn't be so Certain About Abortion," by Michael (The New York Times).
  • "How Will We Punish Women Who Have Abortions?" by Jane, (The New York Times).
  • "The Argument" episode discussing the Dobbs decision, with Ross Douthat and Michelle Goldberg (The New York Times).
  • "Making Abortion Illegal and Unthinkable," by Ryan T. Anderson and Alexandra Desanctis (National Review).
  • Kevin D. Williamson discussing his email exchange with Jane, in National Review's online blog.
  • "The Abortion Stories We Didn't Tell," by Rebecca Traister (New York Magazine).
  • The full transcript of 2016's third presidential debate (Politico).

Categories