How 'Pro-Choice' are Democrats?

The official Democratic Party platform "strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay."

Reason TV talked with Democratic delegates and supporters at the 2012 Democratic National Convention in Charlotte and found that most were on board with the party's strong pro-choice stance. But when pressed to talk about whether or not they were pro-choice in areas of human activity beyond abortion, delegates and supporters seemed less certain and, at times, outright hostile to the notion of increased choice. 

Approximately 4 minutes.

Produced by Paul Detrick and Zach Weissmueller.

Go to for downloadable versions and subscribe to ReasonTV's YouTube Channel to receive notifications when new material goes live.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Suki||

    As long as your choice is abortion, you get to be "pro-choice."

  • ||

    I'm drowning in teh stupidz. And the hypocrisyz.

  • LibertarianAmazon||


  • aelhues||

    I have to say, that was quite entertaining. The annoying thing however is, I have tried that exact line of questioning with a few liberals I know, and they just seem to refuse to acknowlege the problem. It is perfectly alright for them to be 100% pro-choice until the moment of birth, but take away my rights to; raise my kids the way I want, send them to schools I want, participate in risky behavior, act in ways potentially harmful to the environment, etc..

    It's pretty amazing.

  • SugarFree||

    When in the womb, it's your problem to take care of; after it's born it belongs to the government, like everyone else.

  • WTF||

    And, they believe in 'my body; my choice', except for trans-fats, four-loko, sweetened drinks,union membership, etc. etc.

  • BarryD||

    It's not just "risky" or "potentially harmful." We don't even know the costs/benefits of certain behaviors and choices. Sometimes the facts are grossly distorted to make them appear other than they are for political reasons (e.g. self-defense with firearms).

    Every single prediction of the climate alarmists has been wrong -- WAY wrong.

    Physical fitness is required for health and quality of life, but it involves the risk of injury. The same goes for outdoor activities of all sorts.

    Is it not possible that people who read by the light of 100 Watt incandescent bulbs will have better vision at age 75 than those who didn't? How can we know?

    It's not just about whether we can engage in "bad" behaviors. How can that even be defined?

  • aelhues||

    Agree'd. Claim doubt in the supposed facts about AGW, nutrition, etc., and you generally get a look one would give to a neanderthal trying to lecture you on quantum physics.

  • dinkster||

    Talking to liberals in person, and pointing out these circular logic faults result in two things, first they call you Hitler, second they storm out of the bar. This cycle repeats daily.

  • ||

    I'm for putting anything you want into your body, unless we are talking about certain foods...and sometimes your mouth.

  • ||

    BTW, I am pro-choice on abortion. I'm also pro-choice on every other fucking thing is life, too. These people's"reasoning" is nauseating. Elitist scum.

  • SugarFree||

    "Your fetus? You didn't build that."

  • ||

    Actually, mitosis built that. So no, you didn't. Idiot.

  • SugarFree||

    Mitosis is the will of the people and the will of the people is law.

    Renew! RENEW!

  • ||

    Yeah, but if I didn't make whoopee, there would be no embryonic mitosis. So there. I did build dat. Well, 1/2 of dat.

  • ||

    (disclaimer: I ain't never built no embryos or fetii. Never so much as even a "scare".)


    You are failing your duty to the collective to produce more taxpayers. To the breeding chambers with you forthwith!

  • Mensan||

    Fetuses ≠ fetii. Fetus isn't a Latin word; it's Greek. [/pedant]

  • ||

    Obama, Obama, Obama!!!

  • sarcasmic||

    Tolerance means they support people who agree with them, and are intolerant of everyone else.

    Inclusiveness means they include people who agree with them, and everyone else is excluded.

    Choice means they support the right to make the same choices that they would make, and everyone else can fuck off.

    At least they're consistent.

  • Brutus||

    They don't care what you do, so long as it's compulsory.

  • ||

    Also, you could take a similar line of questioning to the RNC and get similar illogical answers. As in, the R delegates are for "limited government", but not when it comes to abortion and gay buttsecks and teh drugz.

  • sarcasmic||

    Yep, they want to "limited government" all right. Just as long as it doesn't affect the sick, the old, the troops, national defense, space exploration, the drug war, emergency services, education...

  • Spoonman.||

    The Daily Show did a series of these at the RNC which was pretty excellent as well. Basically the exact mirror image responses.

  • LibertarianAmazon||

    Hypocrisy shows no favorites to either side of the aisle. It spreads its blind stupidity evenly, with an extra dollop at the far ends of the spectrum.

  • Floccina||

    IMO most democrats are not pro-choice they are pro abortion.

    1. They want to fund abortions with tax dollars.
    2. They are generally very concerned and fearful about population growth.
    3. They seldom have large families themselves.

    It all adds up to being pro abortion and so it is not surprising that they do not care about the freedom to put what you want into your body. Abortion to them is not about what you can do with your own body. Some are pro-choice as are some republicans and many libertarians.

  • aelhues||

    I also find this to be true. If they were truly about the freedom of choice, because it has to do with one's own body, they wouldn't be so willing to take away the freedom of choice in other areas pertaining to one's own body.

  • Mensan||

    After the presentation I sat through today on neural tube defects, I'm feeling pretty pro-abortion today. At least in cases of severe birth defects.

  • dinkster||

    The Spartans used to just throw the defective units off a cliff side. Too bad there is an statue of limits for when age determines when the "defective unit" label applies.

  • RightNut||

    So Democrats are against choosing what to eat, what to drink, what to buy, what organizations to join(Unions). But don't worry, they are for choosing whether or not to have an abortion. I guess having 1 choice in life is better than having none?

  • iMark||

    I am amazed at the "reasoning" these folks display.

  • Agile Cyborg||

    The last lady sums'em all up: Dems are 'pro-intervention'. I'd love to see some pro-lifers start throwing this term at the pro-choice camp. I'll buy the beer and tortillas. One can only imagine the entertaining, yet pretzelian, glop of irrationality this will result in.

  • dinkster||

    "Don't mix an acid with a base, you dummy!"

  • ThatSkepticGuy||

    An abortion is a private matter concerning a woman, her body and the money the Democrats want to take from you to pay for it.

  • An0nB0t||

    I really, really want to see unedited video of all of Zach's interviews there at loonypalooza.

  • dinkster||

    There was only one woman who realized her folly and recanted her position on unions, on the fly no less. That woman is likely a future libertarian, assuming she can overcome her, "People are contradictions" quip.

  • originalgrissel||

    What I found so interesting about that video was the woman that was saying, that folks should only get to make choices that have good outcomes looked like she had been making a lot of unhealthy food choices herself, yet she feels that she is qualified to say what is or is not going to be healthy for someone else. The hypocrisy is sadly, not that shocking. The part I enjoyed most though, was the incredible levels of arrogance elitist snobbery that were dripping off of "Ms.ABD-All But Dissertation". Wow! She didn't even try to hide her utter disdain for people that didn't attend college, or who didn't waste their time and money getting multiple, useless degrees, like I'm sure she did. Basically in her view, if you aren't as over-educated pretentious as she is, you must be a drooling idiot that can barely feed yourself so you certainly shouldn't be allowed to be responsible for making choices about your child's education. I'd be willing to bet that none of her degrees are in anything you could actually use to get a job outside of academia.

  • LibertarianAmazon||

    Just wait, then the financial apocalypse comes, she'll be prepped with tons of college degrees to wipe her ass on when she runs out of toilet paper.

  • LibertarianAmazon||

    In Scientific American, they will finally show that just as there is anti-matter, and it is the opposite of matter (in extremely simple layman's terms), there is anti-logic to logic.

    If think if I was in that vicinity, my head would have shuddered violently before my brain exploding due to being exposed to so much anti-logic. As it is, just watching that video made my brain hurt, which shows you that like Schrodinger's cat, just merely observing the anti-logic could have profound effects on logic.

  • dinkster||

    It isn't just intentional irrationality? I feel therefore I understand?

  • dig mart||

    is so bad .

  • Normajeana||

    What I find interesting is that when these 'pro choice' for abortion people are confronted with the religious conservative 'research' which 'shows' that abortions have 'bad outcomes' in terms of 'post abortion stress disorder,' they are quick to point out the ideological bias of the researchers... but when sex worker activists like me ask them about pro choice for sex work (for consenting adults), they refuse to believe that the so called research of people like Melissa Farley- who claims that all sex work is 'bad for the body, bad for the heart'- is as ideologically biased as that of the religious conservative researchers.

    Unfortunately I find that there are a number of so called libertarians who also accept the premise that all sex work harms women- and for them, that is also not an allowable 'choice' for women. And even in this discussion, I don't see anyone else talking about prostitution as a viable choice for adults... it is just left out of conversations as being too thorny an issue to discuss.

Click here to follow Reason on Instagram


Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.