Are women worthy of the same fundamental rights as men, or are they not?

Somehow that's the debate the Democratic Party finds itself in this week.

To recap: Last week liberal champion Sen. Bernie Sanders questioned the progressive credentials of Democratic candidate Jon Ossoff, who is gearing up for a run-off in Georgia for Tom Price's former congressional seat. The move upset many Democrats who hope to win the seat from Republican Karen Handel, whose claim to fame was working to defund Planned Parenthood while head of the Susan G. Komen Foundation. Sanders followed that up by endorsing Heath Mello, a Omaha mayoral candidate who previously supported forcing women seeking abortions to first view an ultrasound of the fetus. (I must note he's since vowed to protect reproductive rights.)

It appears "Sanders's progressive test lies largely on economic issues, not social or cultural ones," The Wall Street Journal put it.

The uproar from groups like NARAL was swift, hitting Sanders in the midst of his "unity tour" with Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez. While Perez initially defended Sanders' endorsements, he later changed course and declared support for reproductive rights an essential litmus test for inclusion in the Democratic Party. "Every Democrat, like every American, should support a woman's right to make her own choices about her body and her health," Perez said. "That is not negotiable and should not change city by city or state by state."

Editorial Cartoons on Democrats in the Trump Era View All 58 Images

There's no reason this should be controversial. Reproductive choice is the cornerstone of women's equality – if the Democratic Party is in favor of women having the same economic opportunities as men, then it follows they must support women's right to control their own bodies, to have the same autonomy men take for granted. In other words, if Sanders favors a progressive test that focuses on economic issues, then reproductive choice is a key part of that.

This is not to say there should be an ideological purity test for Democrats, akin to the tea party's rabid primarying of any Republican deemed "not conservative enough" in 2010.

But there must be some fundamental values shared by a political party, and surely the recognition that women are human beings is one we can all agree upon. As the Supreme Court noted in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, "The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives."

And that's the crux of it: Reproductive choice circumscribes women's economic opportunity. Women who have access to contraception have been found to earn at least 40 percent more than those without regular access. Early access to family planning is linked to higher college enrollment and graduation rates. Unintended pregnancies perpetuate the cycle of poverty and reliance on government programs – conversely, family planning programs demonstrably lower the poverty rate, an effect which follows children into adulthood. The only way women can have autonomy over their lives – plan their careers, relationships and social contributions – is if they can control when and if to have children.

Progressives wouldn't stomach a Democratic candidate who questioned the necessity of Brown v. Board of Education, so why might we make an exception when it comes to women's economic well-being?