The Paradox of the Political Parties

By Ravenne Reid on April 30, 2017

In keeping with the dichotomous relationship between the Democratic and Republican parties, the connotations associated with these affiliations are also dual in nature. For the most part, the political arena is made up of Democrats who identify as liberal and Republicans who identify as conservative.

Rather than merely equating American citizens with categories, these labels are also clues that could reveal possible voting patterns, policy preferences, and, above all else, attitudes towards widely disputed issues.

The latter indication has shaped political discourse since the year 1960, a time when former President John F. Kennedy accepted New York’s Liberal Party nomination and famously declared, “If by a ‘liberal’ they mean someone who … cares about the welfare of the people [and] their health … then I am proud to say I am a ‘liberal.’”

Although Kennedy’s words are still relevant to the attitudes of modern-day liberals, their party is not allied with this line of thinking. The irony of American politics rests in the fact that the party that is mostly concerned with the quality of life is not considered pro-life.

Following the Roe v. Wade (1973) landmark case, in which the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a woman’s choice to terminate a pregnancy, the term “pro-life” was coined to refer to activists who were mobilized against abortion rights.

In their book, Encyclopedia of Women in American Politics, Jeffrey D. Schultz and Laura A. Van Assendelft wrote, “Movement leaders chose the ‘pro-life’ label to put forward a positive image and to focus attention on their core argument —that abortion amounts to taking the life of an unborn child.”

Even though the most vocal campaigners against abortion, particularly members of the National Right to Life Committee, were unable to achieve their primary goal of overturning Roe v. Wade, they were successful in helping to implement the Hyde Amendment in 1976. This law prohibits taxpayer money from funding abortions except in extreme cases, such as pregnancy resulting from rape or incest. Moreover, the Hyde Amendment paved the way for non-secular policies that gained support from self-proclaimed conservatives.

In that same year, Republican Party leaders adopted a platform position on abortion at their national convention. Hoping to gain the support of Catholics in the coming election, former Republican National Committee chairman Bob Dole drafted a pro-life proposal that “granted a constitutional right to life from the moment of conception.”

From then on, radicalized Republicans have taken advantage of the positive connotations that accompany the label pro-life, while their Democratic counterparts are called “pro-choice.” However, these descriptions are not reflective of the policy positions that these parties support. Although Republicans are avid defenders of the unborn, their pro-war and pro-death penalty stances render their value of human life futile.

In addition to establishing ideological congruence, the issue of abortion has also played a role in shaping American healthcare. According to Oxford Dictionaries, healthcare is described as “the maintenance and improvement of physical and mental health.” A woman who has the option of deciding what is best for herself is, in fact, a means of protecting her well-being, and thus sustaining the quality of her life.

Such a belief has been adopted by a well-known family planning institution, Planned Parenthood, which not only supplies birth control, but also offers cancer screenings, STI treatment, and HIV testing. While the services that this organization provides are useful as well as life-saving, its inclusion of abortion is perceived negatively by Republicans, especially the president.

Fulfilling his campaign promise to defund Planned Parenthood, President Donald Trump signed a bill allowing states to reserve taxpayer money from organizations that perform abortions. By pushing this bill, Trump has confirmed that he is indeed a conservative. Even more so, his decision to limit access to affordable healthcare options and ultimately endanger the lives of millions of women has proven that he is pro-life, at least by the ironic standards of American politics.

According to Emily Crockett, “Marie Stopes International estimates that the loss of [Planned Parenthood’s] services will cause 6.5 million unintended pregnancies … 2.1 million unsafe abortions, and 21,700 maternal deaths just in Trump’s first term.”

While the president’s actions are accepted by Republicans because they protect the rights of unborn babies, the blatant disregard for the welfare of women who will not have access to the benefits of health insurance without this organization’s low-cost options is a contradiction to their pro-life stance. Moreover, conservatives’ concern for the lives of unborn children is substantial compared to their concern for the lives of children that have been cut short.

Without question, liberals and conservatives have not been successful in finding common ground on the issue of gun control. In accordance with their traditionalist views, Republicans are adamant in their belief that the Second Amendment, which guarantees the right to bear arms, is a fundamental privilege that reinforces their patriotism.

To conservatives, guns act as symbols for nationalist sentiments, rather than just objects used for self-defense. As a result, common-sense gun control proposals that aim to prevent these weapons from getting into the wrong hands are perceived as attempts to impede on American liberties. Republicans’ indifference towards preventative measures against gun violence is inconsistent with their consensus that they value all lives, especially that of a child’s.

According to Jennifer Mascia, “A remarkable 75 percent of children killed with guns … have been under the age of 12. Since the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut … an American child under 12 has died by … gunfire every other day.”

Even if those appalling statistics are not enough to tug on their heartstrings, conservatives, being the avid pro-lifers that they are, should be the ones who are more inclined to prevent the deaths of children. Likewise, members of the Republican Party should be the ones who are willing to strip the mentally and emotionally unstable of their gun rights. Firearms are not as patriotic when they are in the hands of a terrorist.

Following the Pulse Nightclub shooting, which was the deadliest terrorist attack on United States soil since 9/11, in a 53 to 47 vote, an overwhelming majority of Republicans rejected four bills that would require background checks for gun buyers and prohibit those on terrorist watch and no-fly lists from buying one altogether.

While Democrats were attempting to implement proposals that would protect people from gun violence, Republicans had the “difficult” task of simply offering their thoughts and prayers to the families of the 49 victims who lost their lives that night. To these congressmen’s dismay, thoughts and prayers are not as meaningful when a person has the opportunity to potentially save additional lives but refuses to enforce them.

As the saying goes, actions speak louder than words. Even though they claim to be advocates for life, conservatives who praise the president when he denies low-income women of their healthcare and applaud Republican senators when they refuse to sign off on bills that aim to curb both accidental and intentional shootings inadvertently reveal their true colors.

If Republicans feel more compelled to put their desire for anti-choice healthcare options over the interests of women and gun-toting fixations over the well-being of prospective targets, then they are not choosing life. Unfortunately, the party that does fight for a better quality of life, supporting policies that wish to stop avoidable deaths, are not granted the privilege of being called pro-life.

However, even on the matter of abortion, members of the Democratic Party take into consideration the women who are raped, the women whose babies are detrimental to their health, and the women who are poor and may not be earning a sufficient living wage to take care of themselves, not to mention a child.

To force a woman to bring a baby into this world without the resources to take care of him or her is more anti-life than reassuring her option of having an abortion if necessary. For this reason, Republicans should just admit that they are not pro-life, but rather pro-birth.

pexels.com

Follow Uloop

Apply to Write for Uloop News

Join the Uloop News Team

Discuss This Article

Back to Top

Log In

Contact Us

Upload An Image

Please select an image to upload
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format
OR
Provide URL where image can be downloaded
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format

By clicking this button,
you agree to the terms of use

By clicking "Create Alert" I agree to the Uloop Terms of Use.

Image not available.

Add a Photo

Please select a photo to upload
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format