Posted on 07/27/2002 8:04:41 AM PDT by narses
PRINCETON, New Jersey, Jul 25, 02 (LSN.ca/CWNews.com) - A slight majority of Americans are philosophically "pro-choice," according to polls by the Gallup organization. But the vast majority consistently say that abortion should be legal "only under certain circumstances."
Gallup's polling consistently reveals that from 51 percent to 54 percent of Americans believe abortion should be "legal only under certain circumstances" -- while just 25 percent to 27 percent says it should be "legal under any circumstances" and 18 percent to 22 percent that it should be "illegal in all circumstances." Furthermore, these breakdowns in opinion have largely prevailed since the 1970s.
What that means is that status-quo abortion on demand does not reflect the beliefs of 75 percent of Americans, and that since the 1970s, the view of only 25 percent of Americans has been imposed as law by activist court judges and abortion supporting politicians.
In addition, 86 percent of Americans support restrictions on abortion in the third trimester, and 69 percent in the second trimester. Sixty-two percent support restrictions when a woman says she "can't afford" the baby; and 51 percent would support restrictions on abortion of children diagnosed as mentally handicapped.
Most Americans also support informed consent, "requiring doctors to inform patients about alternatives to abortion before performing the procedure." Only 11 percent were opposed. Similarly, a Gallup survey in 1996 found 74 percent in favor of parental consent for minors seeking an abortion.
I'd be hard pressed to find anybody I know who is completely pro-life... but, I live in Massachusetts. Nuff said!
This sentence and the explanation that follows are one of the more blantant examples of pro-abortion spin that I've seen in a long time. When the three choices are 1. abortion always illegal, 2. abortion illegal under certain circumstances, and 3. abortion always legal, even many people in the anti-abortion movement choose the second option. I believe that abortion should be allowed if the pregnancy is a real and serious medical threat to the mother's life or health. I also believe that a woman who is impregnated during rape should not have to carry the baby forced on her by the rapist. However, even with these two exceptions, the laws that I would most favor would prohibit over 95% of all abortions. To say that I am "philosophically pro-choice" is wishful thinking on the part of the pro-abortion crowd.
From other polls, I've heard that Americans are split about half and half on whether abortion is acceptable. Most seem to think that it isn't a good thing no matter what but that it shouldn't be illegal. I think they haven't considered whether the unborn child is a person and whether there are any justifiable grounds for taking that person's life. If more people considered the evidence, I think they would recognize that the unborn child is a person and oppose legalized abortion in almost all cases. I can see how that point gets obscured in the name-calling on both sides, but people need to look at the issue more closely and ignore the personalities.
In either case, the guy who wrote this piece has slanted the issue horribly.
Up here, if I went around and asked about abortion beliefs, it would go something like this:
Q. "Do you belive abortion should be legal?"
A. "Well... I don't personally believe in it and I'd never have one myself, but I don't believe I should dictate to others."
Q. "What about partial birth abortion?"
A. "I think it is horrible and I wouldn't do it, but I can't dictate to others. Women should be able to make up their own minds."
Well, I live in a "blue" state, due to voter fraud, and I am over-whelmingly pro-life. I have to admit that a lot of my friends are ambivilent until they hear me talk. Then they cave in, but I'm sure they express another opinion when out of my earshot.
LOL. I know the scenerio! They nod their heads and shut-up and seem to agree with you and then change the subject. Last week I had the same thing happen to me regarding the Aids prevention question. I think most of my friends think I'm slightly "off" for the positions I take. Oh well. I figure maybe I can give them "the other side" (a/k/a the road less traveled).
If they did this, they would make pro-choice Democrats look like extremists. Unfortunately, they instead let themselves be painted as people who would willingly see women raped and then forced to birth and raise the rapists' children (I'm not saying the Republicans really are like that, but that they get painted that way).
What Republicans need to publically acknowledge is that not everything that is wrong and abhorrent can be outlawed, and that it would be both foolish and ineffective to push for restrictions that the majority of people wouldn't support, unless or until such time as the majority of people support them. While most Republicans are well aware that there's no possibility of suddenly passing a complete ban on abortion which extends all the way to cover certain contraceptives, there are a significant number of people who vote Democrat out of fear that the Republicans would do precisely that.
There's the problem. Actually, I've become convinced that the Republican heirarchy is nearly as leftist as the Demonrats. They've never lost an election by running to the right, but they keep going for "the big tent", ie; running off the people who do vote for them in order to get the votes of people who don't like them. I've ceased to believe that they're stupid enough to believe that conservatism doesn't win elections.
I, too, was one of those apathetic Americans until I read the autobiography of Ronald Reagan.
Alan Keyes has also helped me to understand that our constitutional republic was founded to protect the powerless (unborn, unable to vote) from the powerful (women who vote). Previous to the creation of our constitution, the powerless had been the poor and the powerful had been the landowner.
Apathetic Americans don't take the time to carefully consider the crime of abortion and how the argument supporting abortion is an argument based upon time. Time, of course, is a creation of man to measure his earthly existance, but God (which 95% of Americans believe in) is eternal, or timeless.
I know. You're right that the statement can be taken too many ways. What I meant is that if the doctor said "Yes, we can let the pregnancy continue but it will cause damage that will reduce the woman to a permanent vegetative state," then I would say that the abortion was a medical necessity. I think I once referred to it as a "severe, permanent, physical debilitation." A "health" exception might be impossible to write in a way that couldn't be abused, and I would be willing to abandon it. I don't support the health exception on PBA bans because PBA is never a technique that protects a woman's health.
WFTR
Bill
I originally saw the source as something I didn't recognize but didn't follow the link until I read your post. For a Catholic news agency to report the story this way is sad. I guess the hard-core Catholics believe that anyone who doesn't oppose birth control is "pro-choice." I know that they have a right to hold this belief, but I think they are wrong.
WFTR
Bill
You've just met someone (on-line). But I am from New Jersey. Best, y.b.
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.