From CNN:
WASHINGTON (Creators Syndicate) -- With more than a whiff of self-congratulations, Democrats love to call themselves the tolerant party.
However, that tolerance has never been extended to the millions of Democrats who hold the pro-life position on abortion.
At the 2004 Republican national convention in New York, featured prime time speaking spots were given to California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.
Both men are unapologetically pro-choice on abortion. No pro-life Democrat at the party's Boston convention was seen or heard when the cameras were on.
But just maybe, Democratic leaders, after having righteously and tiresomely lectured the GOP to build a "Big Tent" in order to welcome pro-choice members, may actually, themselves, be starting to practice what they have preached. Consider the following items:
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, chairman of the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee, is actively courting the new Pennsylvania state treasurer, Bob Casey Jr. (son and namesake of the state's late popular, pro-life governor) to run in 2006 against GOP Sen. Rick Santorum, considered a prospective White House candidate.
The pro-choice Schumer, a political realist, believes that the pro-life Casey would be the strongest Democrat against Santorum in a race that would command national media attention.
Two solidly pro-choice California House Democrats, Anna Eshoo and Ellen Tauscher, risk scorn from some feminists to endorse for Democratic National Committee chair their former House colleague and 9/11 Commission member, Tim Roemer of Indiana.
Roemer, a proven winner in a Red State who points out that in the last election "the Democratic Party lost 97 of the fastest-growing counties" and "we've lost ground among Latinos, among Catholics and among church-going African-Americans" is pro-life.
Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry told supporters at a post-election meeting at AFL-CIO headquarters that his campaigning, especially among Pennsylvania blue-collar voters who opposed abortion, convinced him that Democrats must more convincingly express their own dislike of abortion.
To nobody's surprise, this new Democratic "Big Tent " move has been rejected by some party liberals and organized pro-choice groups. Democratic National Committee members have reported receiving anti-Roemer phone calls from NARAL, the abortion rights organization.
Former NARAL leader Kate Michelman told The Associated Press that "the election of such a staunchly anti-choice leader would signal that the Democratic Party is retreating on one of its core principles."
Massachusetts Democratic State Chairman Phil Johnston opposes Roemer and brands an election of the Indiana Democrat to be party chair as "extremely foolish."
Just as Roemer ought not be uncritically endorsed for party chair simply because of his pro-life position (which would be the worst example of one-issue voting), neither should his pro-life position mean his arbitrary disqualification from any consideration.
Pro-life Democrats have been marginalized by party leaders who choose to ignore the political price Democratic candidates have paid for unyielding opposition to parental consent laws or limitations on partial birth or late-term abortion.
When 8,218 actual voters were asked by the Los Angeles Times on Election Day 2000 "which issues if any were most important to you in deciding how you would vote for president today?" 14 percent answered abortion.
Among that 14 percent -- who named abortion and who represented 14.7 million voters -- they split their presidential choice 58 percent for Republican George W. Bush and 41 percent for Democrat Al Gore.
To put it another way, that translated into a plurality for Bush just on the abortion issue of 2.5 million votes in an election that Bush, it is remembered, lost nationally by more than 540,000 votes.
Intolerant liberals must reject the widely held prejudice of pro-life voters as narrow-minded, gun-loving, sex-obsessed anti-intellectuals.
Many pro-life Democrats embrace the "seamless garment" doctrine of the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin of Chicago, which teaches a "consistent ethic of life" that includes not only opposition to abortion and capital punishment and euthanasia, but to war on civilians and racism.
The consistent ethic of life commits one to fight for human rights and economic justice, and to eliminate poverty. Neither American party obviously meets all the tests.
But Democrats, if they will just begin to treat their own pro-life voters with respect and tolerance, can come a lot closer to the "seamless garment" ideal and improve the party's election chances in 2006.
