The Left is not taking well to Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Ben Ray Lujan's comments this week that the House Democratic campaign arm will not withhold funds from Democratic candidates who do not pledge full allegiance to abortion on demand without apology.

And it isn't just the groups explicitly about abortion that are upset. Democracy for America, a left-wing group spun off long ago from Howard Dean's unsuccessful 2004 presidential campaign, reacted with an especially strident statement that really jumps out at you. It kind of blows the doors off the nation's consensus position on abortion — that whether you're for it or against it being legal, it is something we recognize as not good, and we generally take sides on it based on whether we want to abolish it or tolerate as a necessary evil.

The portion of the DFA statement that I have marked in bold here is actually highlighted in yellow in the original statement via email:

"It is profoundly disturbing to hear the person tasked with helping Democrats take back the House suggest that our party can credibly talk about confronting economic inequity, while turning a blind eye to candidates who want to limit women's right to control their own bodies. Abortion rights are inextricably tied to the fight against economic and racial inequity, full stop, and until all leaders of our party fully understand that we're going to keep losing.

The email statement goes on to argue that Democrats won in 2006 "in spite of the handful of anti-choice corporatists who ran as Democrats, not because of them. And, years later, it was many of those same corporate and anti-choice Democrats who worked to limit health care reform and water down efforts to restrain Wall Street greed." This is, of course, completely wrong in terms of 2006, but leave that for another day.

The statement further implies (but does not say explicitly) that the DCCC should not be funding candidates who have pro-life records. This is a continuation of the fight over Heath Mello, the Democratic Omaha mayoral candidate who may have lost his election this spring because he was publicly called out and nearly disavowed by Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez because he had an anti-abortion voting record in the state legislature.

It's already pretty daft to argue that a lack of commitment to abortion rights has ever been a political problem for Democrats. To be sure, there are places where their postition in favor of abortion rights is an asset; it's just that Democrats won in most of those places in 2016, and they remain a minority party nonetheless.

What's more, it's not really disputable that Democrats' majority in 2006 was built on self-described pro-life Democratic candidates, and there probably wouldn't have been an Obamacare bill without them. As for the voters, national exit polling year after year continues to demonstrate that the abortion issue is at best a modest net negative for the Democratic Party when you consider only the voters for whom it is a crucial issue.

But set that all aside, because it's quite a jump beyond any of that to say that one's enthusiasm for killing babies in the womb is part of some quest for racial justice. When you consider that black children are aborted at a rate roughly three times of white ones, you have to wonder what the true intention is behind this sort of fanatical commitment to abortion.

It's almost as if they protest too much.