Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Berkley Professor Wonders Why More Americans Donít Accept Abortion
http://liveactionnews.org/culture/a-berkley-professor-wonders-why-more-americans-dont-accept-abortion/ ^ | 3/7/2012 | Calvin Freiburger

Posted on 03/07/2012 7:15:50 PM PST by Morgana

Implicit in most pro-abortion commentary is a certain level of frustration that there remain people who disagree with them. “It’s the 21st century and the Supreme Court has spoken; can’t you anti-choice yahoos get with the program?” This leads to all sorts of outlandish speculation about what really makes pro-lifers tick.

Yesterday, UC Berkley sociology professor Claude Fischer published his thoughts on the “abortion puzzle,” attempting to figure out why Americans are growing “notably more laissez-faire on most sexual issues,” but not abortion:

Before the Roe v. Wade decision on behalf of abortion rights perhaps 25% to 30% of Americans were inclined to say yes [abortion is acceptable for any reason]. Then opinions shifted a bit in the liberal direction. Since that initial shift, however, the distribution of opinions has changed little. The trend since Roe v. Wade is displayed in the blue line in the graph below. About 37% of Americans said yes to abortion on demand at the end of the 1970s and about 41% said yes at the end of the 2000s.

Contrast that to the change, three times greater, in the percentage who said that “sex relations before marriage… [is"] not wrong at all” — the red line — from about 38% at the end of the 1970s to about 51% at the end of the 2000s. And contrast that to the shift, five-fold greater, the green line, in the percentage of Americans who disagreed with the proposition that “Women should take care of running their homes and leave running the country up to men.” Another perspective on this compares generations of Americans. The generation born in the 1970s was far more liberal than the generation born in the 1910s on whether women should stay at home and on premarital sex (by over 30 points on each question). But the 1970s generation was only a bit more liberal on abortion than the 1910s generation (only 7 points more).

To begin with, the premise’s question is flawed in two ways. First, while conservative and religious people are more likely to value stay-at-home motherhood, that’s a far cry from believing women should “leave running the country up to men.” If social conservatives didn’t believe in women having professional lives or political influence, then how do you explain Gov. Sarah Palin’s popularity among values voters, or the fact that the leaders of Live Action, American Life League, Americans United for Life, and the National Right to Life Committee are all women? This isn’t a recent phenomenon, as Fischer suggests—Mildred Jefferson helped found NRLC back in 1970, and Phyllis Schlafly has been an influential advocate for conservative cultural views since the sixties.

Second, abortion is not primarily a sexual issue. It’s related to sex because sex makes babies and abortion helps people have sex without becoming parents, but it’s only controversial because of what it destroys. But Fischer admits as much later in the piece, so more on this below.

Fischer cites a few sociologists who argue that disputes about gender roles lie at the heart of the abortion debate:

For one side, motherhood was the essence of being a woman, in which case abortion, especially abortion for convenience, devalued women’s purpose in life. For the other side, women were, or should be, essentially like men in ambitions and careers, in which case unwanted pregnancies undermined their freedom and the validity of their dreams.

But as time passed, the story goes, women’s reasons for getting abortions shifted, as did society’s conception of motherhood. With “how we understand motherhood…removed from the abortion debate, what remains are concerns about faith and about the personhood of the fetus”—“harder issues” to resolve than that of a woman’s place.

Could be. Or, it could be that personhood of the fetus was always pro-lifers’ chief concern, but the general public’s limited understanding of embryology made it easier to dismiss personhood as a strictly theological question. But as the science became clearer and ultrasound technology advanced, the truth of the pro-life message caught the attention of many who otherwise would have dismissed abortion as a private sexual matter.

Here’s a crazy idea: instead of writing books and commissioning studies about why pro-lifers believe certain things, maybe these guys could, y’know, ask us? Then again, the answer can’t possibly be as simple as “those people don’t want innocent babies murdered,” because that would raise some deeply disturbing questions about why pro-choicers don’t agree.


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: abortion; moralabsolutes; professor; prolife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-58 next last
I'll let the FReepers explain to the educated idiot why Americans, decent ones that is, don't accept abortion.
1 posted on 03/07/2012 7:15:57 PM PST by Morgana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Morgana

He can no longer understand. His conscience has been seared by a hot iron.


2 posted on 03/07/2012 7:18:43 PM PST by Jedidah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Maybe it is because they do not like to KILL children?


3 posted on 03/07/2012 7:19:54 PM PST by ogen hal (First amendment or reeducation camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Killing babies doesn’t appeal to most people.


4 posted on 03/07/2012 7:20:51 PM PST by doc1019 (Romney will never get my vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah

Conscience? Honestly with some people one has to wonder. When God was passing out this thing called a conscience they were out for a beer.

This man and others in the abortion industry are those types.


5 posted on 03/07/2012 7:20:51 PM PST by Morgana (I only come here to see what happens next. It normally does.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Morgana
“It’s the 21st century and the Supreme Court has spoken; can’t you anti-choice yahoos get with the program?”

It's the 21st century and God has spoken; can't you anti-life yahoos get with the program?

6 posted on 03/07/2012 7:22:24 PM PST by al_c (http://www.blowoutcongress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

I can’t imagine why more people don’t agree with murdering babies, unborn or born. How silly of us!
excuse me while I go throw up.


7 posted on 03/07/2012 7:23:37 PM PST by Shimmer1 (No matter how cynical I get, I just can't keep up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Because some of still have morals, you idiot.


8 posted on 03/07/2012 7:25:08 PM PST by deweyfrank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shimmer1

AMEN!


9 posted on 03/07/2012 7:25:12 PM PST by doc1019 (Romney will never get my vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

I’m wondering why this professor doesn’t perform a late term abortion on himself?


10 posted on 03/07/2012 7:28:13 PM PST by Artcore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana
UC Berkley sociology professor

That's all I needed to read to understand this ALLEGEDLY educated idiot's position.

11 posted on 03/07/2012 7:29:42 PM PST by ssaftler (Obama 2008: "Hope and Change" Obama 2012: "Excuses and Blame")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana
Hmm... His name is Claude. Obviously a male that wants to tell women to accept killing their babies. I thought their mantra was that it was no one else’s business except the women's? He's a sexist pig! Demand his resignation NOW! (Get it NOW and now!) I'm a woman and if this guy thinks he knows it all have him bond with an unborn baby and if he's still for abortion he's even more of a vile scum.
12 posted on 03/07/2012 7:33:56 PM PST by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

“Why won’t you conservatives get on board with killing millions of babies? It should be obvious that is a good thing!”

Liberalism is a racist nihilistic culture. This whine puts it out there for all to see.


13 posted on 03/07/2012 7:34:33 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Spoiler Alert! The secret to Terra Nova: THEY ARE ALL DEAD!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Has this a-hole academic actually ever seen graphic pictures of the results of an abortion?


14 posted on 03/07/2012 7:37:31 PM PST by rfp1234 (RFP's Law: Whoever blames Bush first shall lose the argument.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

“can’t you anti-choice yahoos get with the program?”

He’s sooooo much smarter than us, isn’t he?

I’m sure he’s never contemplated his mother making the “choice” he’d like to foist on those of us with consciences.

-—signed, anti-murder for convenience yahoo.


15 posted on 03/07/2012 7:38:50 PM PST by Mortrey (Impeach President Soros)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Perhaps he needs to “off” himself, By making his own abortion retroactive, he could set an example for us...


16 posted on 03/07/2012 7:39:17 PM PST by Quickgun (Second Amendment. The only one you can put your hands on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Well if he needs it explained, he will never understand.


17 posted on 03/07/2012 7:39:38 PM PST by Impala64ssa (You call me an islamophobe like it's a bad thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

Well if he needs it explained, he will never understand.


18 posted on 03/07/2012 7:41:29 PM PST by Impala64ssa (You call me an islamophobe like it's a bad thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana
"Fischer cites a few sociologists who argue that disputes about gender roles lie at the heart of the abortion debate:"

What lies at the "heart of the abortion debate" is the taking of an innocent life.

Moron.

19 posted on 03/07/2012 7:42:03 PM PST by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Impala64ssa

Let me see, define certain humans as not being worthy of life, make it the “law”, and then sit in wonder as other human beings don’t “grasp” the concept.


20 posted on 03/07/2012 7:42:46 PM PST by boop (I hate hippies and dopeheads. Just hate them. ...Ernest Borgnine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-58 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson