Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Poll: 62% of Americans believe abortion is morally wrong
Washington Examiner ^ | January 22, 2014 | CHARLIE SPIERING

Posted on 01/22/2014 5:52:40 PM PST by neverdem

A new Knights of Columbus/Marist poll released Wednesday shows that more than six in 10 Americans believe that abortion is morally wrong.

Sixty-two percent of those polled believed that abortion is morally wrong, and only 36 percent found it morally acceptable. Two percent of Americans indicated that it was not a moral issue.

Fifty-three percent of respondents said they believe life begins at conception.

The poll shows that most Americans choose a more moderate position on abortion, but believe it should be restricted.

Support for restrictions on abortion includes 79 percent supporting a 24-hour waiting period, 58 percent supporting a woman receiving an ultrasound before her abortion and 80 percent supporting parental notification for underage patients.

Even respondents who identify themselves as strongly pro-choice indicated that they do not believe in unrestricted access to abortions.

Sixty-four percent of strongly pro-choice Americans agreed that a patient should wait 24 hours before an abortion and consult with professionals, 62 percent support parental notification and 68 percent believe doctors who perform abortions should be required to have hospital admitting privileges.

The release of the poll coincides with the National March for Life in Washington.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: abortion; prolife

1 posted on 01/22/2014 5:52:40 PM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem

It would be nice if they could show results that say what percentage of Americans believe all abortions should be outlawed and abortion clinics should all be permanently shut down. Unfortunately, the sad truth is I suspect that only a small minority would answer yes on that.


2 posted on 01/22/2014 5:54:41 PM PST by freedom462
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

“Fifty-three percent of respondents said they believe life begins at conception.”

It is disgusting our candidate run from this issue. DO NOT RUN, the people will stand with us.


3 posted on 01/22/2014 5:55:26 PM PST by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Public opinion on this issue does not matter. Not one bit. Abortion - with its new partner, gay marriage - is now the bedrock principle of the American political order. If some people don’t like it, they can move.


4 posted on 01/22/2014 5:56:54 PM PST by madprof98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

And yet abortion is everywhere paid for by the taxpayers.

Isn’t Obamaland great? :D


5 posted on 01/22/2014 5:59:48 PM PST by Tzimisce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tzimisce

No


6 posted on 01/22/2014 6:02:03 PM PST by DooDahhhh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: freedom462
"It would be nice if they could show results that say what percentage of Americans believe all abortions should be outlawed and abortion clinics should all be permanently shut down. Unfortunately, the sad truth is I suspect that only a small minority would answer yes on that."

We tried a ballot initiative in Colorado, because opinion had swung to about 69% pro-life. In the end, it only got about 25% from voters. And in retrospect, the initiative probably damaged pro-life candidates that were on the ballot that year. While most people think it's wrong, very few feel comfortable making that call for someone else.
7 posted on 01/22/2014 6:09:20 PM PST by CowboyJay (Cruz'-ing in 2016!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

62 percent? That’s the same number of Americans who believe that murder is morally wrong. What a coincidence.


8 posted on 01/22/2014 6:20:05 PM PST by FlingWingFlyer (ObamaCare. The "global warming" of healthcare plans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CowboyJay
We tried a ballot initiative in Colorado, because opinion had swung to about 69% pro-life. In the end, it only got about 25% from voters. And in retrospect, the initiative probably damaged pro-life candidates that were on the ballot that year. While most people think it's wrong, very few feel comfortable making that call for someone else.

Unfortunately, whenever a pro-life issue comes up, the pro-aborts jump in, making wildly emotional claims that the initiative is about making birth control illegal and taking rights away from women.

Unfortunately, even people who are pro-life will vote pro-abortion if they believe that the pro-life vote will result in birth control being made illegal and rights stripped from women.

We need to hit them back with just as much emotionalism. I'm thinking, just start hysterically claiming that pro-aborts think the only purpose of women is to be cash cows for abortionists, they think women are stupid, they want all women to be murderers, etc. Emotionalism (not reason) gets through to low-information voters.

The main thing is to not let the pro-aborts get away with the wild claims that making abortion illegal also makes birth control illegal. The two issues are not related.

9 posted on 01/22/2014 6:22:52 PM PST by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

And yet our leaders can’t parley 62% to 38, into anything of value. Just damn...


10 posted on 01/22/2014 6:25:51 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

What is morally wrong about ripping an unborn baby apart limb from limb and chucking them in the trash can?


11 posted on 01/22/2014 6:27:07 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Elections are more informative than polls.

Two months ago, residents in Albuquerque, New Mexico were asked to outlaw third term abortions.

Hispanics outnumber whites in Albuquerque.

These would be the same Hispanics who are overwhelmingly Catholic, and, according to the Wall Street Journal and Karl Rove, they are “Natural Conservatives.”

The election results?

The Initiative to outlaw third term abortions lost.

55%-45%.

There was no exit polling, but before you blame white hippies.....

2012 Election, New Mexico White Voters:
Romney - 56%
Obama - 41%

12 posted on 01/22/2014 6:47:19 PM PST by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Here, let me fix it:

"What is morally wrong about ripping an unborn baby apart limb from limb with a vacuum cleaner and chucking them in the trash can?"

Imagine if we proposed doing that to Abortion Barbie on TV for all to watch.

Other then the 2% sick trash contingent, I think we'd have 98% agreement at the end of the "show".

It's a barbaric joke to call this a "right".

13 posted on 01/22/2014 6:47:48 PM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon

RE: “DO NOT RUN, the people will stand with us.”

I disagree.

Please see my Comment #12.


14 posted on 01/22/2014 6:49:25 PM PST by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

why it is not 100%, I’ll never understand.


15 posted on 01/22/2014 6:49:27 PM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen

“White Hippies” are not Mormons, by and large.


16 posted on 01/22/2014 6:53:31 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Our society is really so far gone from any semblance of decency and kindness — we may never outlaw abortion again.

The fact is ...people do not want to be inconvenienced with a child, or more than one or two children, at any young age. A pregnancy causes women to lose their figures and get stretch marks. In this insanely image driven society, that’s just not acceptable. Having a child also causes one to grow up fast. Most 20 and even 30 something will admit they just aren’t “grown up” yet themselves to have a child and actually take care of it. They are too busy a. partying. b. careering. c. dating d. traveling. e. drifting f. all of the above.

Babies and family life just isn’t cool these days. Not until you’re on the brink of being old and in danger of never having had a family ...and then there’s this gigantic scramble, fertility panic, etc.

We’re a selfish lot. Blood runs in our streets. Our society suffers more and more and I wonder if it isn’t due to those we have and continue to eliminate, every single day.

We will pay the price one day ...if not soon. Demographics is destiny. We are already seeing it. We claim to be a strong and powerful nation, but we’re truly not. We’re actually very weak, very cowardly as a people, as long as we allow this.


17 posted on 01/22/2014 7:10:39 PM PST by LibsRJerks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

In the “New Math”, the 36 percent sets policy for the 62 percent. But the 62 percent lacks the commitment of the 36 percent.


18 posted on 01/22/2014 7:15:04 PM PST by Theodore R. (TX Republicans can't wait until March 4 to nominate Cornball and George P.!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: exDemMom
"We need to hit them back with just as much emotionalism."

I agree, we need to do a way better job getting the message out and framing the argument. My main point is that this is still a long way from being a winning issue politically, and we need to be careful about requiring candidates to publicly take jingoist stances on it to get through the primaries. I really didn't realize how far away we still are until our ballot initiative lost 3 to 1. Personally, I think the baby boomers will need to age out of the voting booth before anything substantial gets done.

The old feminazis will eventually die off. And alot of them didn't reproduce (for obvious reasons), or their kids/grandkids figured out they're insane. We're winning the war with the younger generations, and we'll eventually get real right to life legislation. But it probably won't happen anytime in the next couple election cycles.
19 posted on 01/22/2014 7:24:26 PM PST by CowboyJay (Cruz'-ing in 2016!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Not sure I understand your comment.

I don’t know the religious demographics of New Mexico.

Do they have a lot of Mormons?

In the past, people have disputed my analysis of the Albuquerque election by claiming that the white electorate is made up of retired hippies and California transplants.

So, I throw the Romney-Obama exit poll back at them.


20 posted on 01/22/2014 7:25:13 PM PST by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen

Yes, They are solidly mormon in most of the state.

Vote-wise, mormons are switch-hitters.


21 posted on 01/22/2014 7:31:18 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Of course not. The same way we allow the 3% (or so) of homos cram their agenda down our throats. People need to realize that we are in the MAJORITY on all these issues. The other side is just louder.....


22 posted on 01/22/2014 8:06:54 PM PST by my small voice (A biased media and an uneducated populace is the biggest threat to our nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy; AuH2ORepublican; GeronL; fieldmarshaldj

Ping


23 posted on 01/22/2014 8:24:44 PM PST by Impy (RED=COMMUNIST, NOT REPUBLICAN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Impy

Obviously, 62% of Americans are extreme right-wing social conservatives who will scare away the moderate suburban moms we need to win elections. < /sarcasm>


24 posted on 01/22/2014 8:39:51 PM PST by BillyBoy (Looking at the weather lately, I could really use some 'global warming' right now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

OBAMA’S CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY- THE TORTURE AND DISMEMBERMENT OF THE UNBORN CHILD

Ken Blackwell

Friday, May 15, 2009

http://townhall.com/columnists/kenblackwell/2009/05/15/obama_and_crimes_against_humanity/page/full

Note: Mr. Blackwell served as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Human Rights Commission from 1991 - 1993.

“In my opinion, the Obama Administration’s abortion agenda is indeed a crime against humanity.”

This is a tale of two worldviews. It begins not unlike the opening paragraph of Dickens’ immortal work, A Tale of Two Cities. Schoolchildren once memorized these famous opening lines, back when schoolchildren memorized anything.

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair…

President Obama at his Hundred Day White House séance proclaimed waterboarding to be torture. His was a clear, unambiguous, declarative statement. In making that statement, he opened up former President Bush and former Vice President Cheney to criminal prosecutions, here and before an international criminal court. And not just these men, but possibly hundreds of others, including members of Congress from his own party.

Cliff May, of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, takes a different approach to the question of whether waterboarding is torture or not. May was badgered by The Daily Show’s Jon Stewart. May’s answer is not as yes/no, as on/off as President Obama’s. May said it depends. May’s answer was more nuanced. Liberals used to like nuance, but that was when John Kerry was nuancing. Here’s how it went:

Jon Stewart: But answer my question: Is waterboarding torture? Yes or no?

Cliff May: Defining torture is not easy. A simple legal definition is that it “shocks the conscience.” Cutting off Daniel Pearl’s head on videotape — that shocks my conscience. Sending a child out as a suicide bomber — that shocks my conscience. People jumping off the World Trade Towers because they’d rather die that way than by burning — that shocks my conscience. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, mastermind of the 9/11 atrocities, gagging for a few minutes and, as a result, providing information that saves lives, then going back to his cell for dinner and a movie — no, my conscience is not shocked by that.

Are our consciences shocked by subjecting KSM to waterboarding? Apparently, this enhanced interrogation technique didn’t shock the consciences of members of Congress who were briefed on its planned use. Some of us need to re-play those tapes of cell phone calls by people trapped in the World Trade Towers.

The question keeps coming back to whether we extend all the rights of American citizens to captured terrorists. And the question also comes back to whether the terrorists are to be accorded all the protections of the Geneva Conventions.

Increasingly, our courts are saying terrorists are to be given constitutional protections, here, in Afghanistan, and at Gitmo. Geneva is another matter. This treaty binds nations to humane treatment of prisoners of war. In order to be counted as a prisoner of war, you must be in uniform (John McCain was, Nathan Hale was not), you must be subject to military discipline, and you must be taking part in a war conducted by competent authority.

The Geneva Convention also governs respect for medical treatment of prisoners and wounded soldiers. Take Al Qaeda in Iraq, for example. When one of their IEDs went off in 2003 near Baghdad and killed and wounded a number of American soldiers, a U.S. Army medical HUMVEE raced to the scene. Waiting for the medics to arrive, the terrorists set off a second IED. It had been planted there specifically to target the medical help. Inside the HUMVEE, an American female nurse was burned beyond recognition.

The purpose of the Geneva Convention was to give warring nations a strong, positive incentive to behave according to international norms and not to engage in conduct that “shocks the conscience.” When we give Al Qaeda or Taliban terrorists prisoner of war status and Geneva Convention coverage—without demanding anything of them in return—we abandon one of the great achievements of the Geneva Convention.

Of course, some humans are not accorded human rights. Our courts have seen to that. President Obama named Justice Stephen Breyer as his ideal jurist. In 2000, Justice Breyer wrote the majority opinion in Carhart v. Stenberg. That was the case in which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional Nebraska’s law against partial-birth abortion. Justice Breyer’s opinion is worth quoting at length.

He described various techniques of late-term abortion that do not shock his conscience. Nor do these techniques—unlike waterboarding, unlike slapping, unlike sleep deprivation—shock President Obama’s conscience, or the consciences of our liberal rulers.

During a pregnancy’s second trimester (12 to 24 weeks), the most common abortion procedure is “dilation and evacuation” (D&E), which involves dilation of the cervix, removal of at least some fetal tissue using nonvacuum surgical instruments, and (after the 15th week) the potential need for instrumental dismemberment of the fetus or the collapse of fetal parts to facilitate evacuation from the uterus.

When such dismemberment is necessary, it typically occurs as the doctor pulls a portion of the fetus through the cervix into the birth canal. The risks of mortality and complication that accompany D&E are significantly lower than those accompanying induced labor procedures (the next safest mid-second-trimester procedures).

A variation of D&E, known as “intact D&E,” is used after 16 weeks. It involves removing the fetus from the uterus through the cervix “intact,” i.e., in one pass rather than several passes. The intact D&E proceeds in one of two ways, depending on whether the fetus presents head first or feet first. The feet-first method is known as “dilation and extraction” (D&X). D&X is ordinarily associated with the term “partial birth abortion.”

A little translation may be required: “at least some fetal tissue” translates to the unborn child’s arm, a leg, or maybe her head. “Dismemberment of the fetus with nonvaccuum surgical instruments” means cutting off her arms or legs with razor-sharp implements while the child, still alive, is capable of feeling excruciating pain.

Rest assured, this is not torture. It doesn’t meet the legal definition of torture because under the rule of Roe v. Wade, the unborn child does not meet the legal definition of a person.

Terrorists were once defined—like pirates and slave traders—as hostis humani generis, enemies of all mankind. As such, they received no due process rights. They had no right to counsel. They received no protections under international agreements. When seized on the high seas by the Royal Navy, they could be promptly hanged upon determination that they were engaged in the proscribed activities.

It would have shocked the consciences of our ancestors, however, to dismember even such low characters as pirates, to cut off their arms and legs, and to let them bleed profusely to death. The most inhuman of humans in the nineteenth century could not have been treated as the least of humans are treated in our enlightened United States, by order of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Our new president abhors torture, unless it is the torture of the unborn. In that case, it is not torture at all, but simply inducing fetal demise.

This great international uproar over what is and is not torture has been generated because of the treatment of three known mass murderers. The slaughter of innocents in their thousands elicits no international outrage. This is part of what Justice Breyer sees as evolving international standards of decency.

In my opinion, the Obama Administration’s abortion agenda is indeed a crime against humanity.

This weekend, President Obama will receive an honorary Doctor of Laws from the University of Notre Dame. There, he will be honored, among other things, for his brave stand against torture. He has appointed Kathleen Sebelius to head our nation’s health system. She is a disciple of the most notorious late-term abortionist in the county, a dismemberer, by his own count, of 60,000 fetuses. The President and Secretary Sebelius want to force us all to pay for abortion-on-demand. They want to force doctors and nurses to take part in killing unborn children. They will doubtless tell us our consciences should not be shocked. They’re only inducing fetal demise. Heaven help us all. And Heaven help Notre Dame.


25 posted on 01/23/2014 9:00:31 AM PST by Dqban22 (IVINIC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: my small voice

Agreed...


26 posted on 01/23/2014 6:45:07 PM PST by DoughtyOne (ZERO is still zero, and John Kerry is a mock-puppet!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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