I consider this the natural course of events:
U.S. support for Roe v. Wade is at its lowest level in decades, according to a new Harris poll.
For 33 years Harris Interactive has been measuring attitudes toward the landmark Supreme Court decision that made abortions legal during the first three months of pregnancy.
The latest telephone survey of 1,016 adults indicates Roe v. Wade is supported by a slim 49% to 47% plurality, compared with 52% who favored the decision in 2005 and 57% in 1998...
...40% of those polled favor laws that would make it more difficult for a woman to get an abortion, while another 40% say no change should be made to existing abortion laws, and 15% favor laws that would make it easier to get an abortion.
What abortion has going for it is the MSM, the cultural elite and the bulk of the legal system. With such power behind it, abortion should be unassailable...and yet, bit by bit, the pro-life movement is chipping away at abortion. I believe this is happening for the simple reason that abortion is an act of heart-wrenching despair. While that tiny minority of pro-abortion fanatics tries to talk itself into believing that abortion is a moral good, most people know that it is wrong...it has just taken decades of work to translate understanding into action.
I do believe that eventually abortion will be banned except to save the life of the mother - this being the only truly humane abortion position, in my view. It might take a few more decades before we arrive at that life-affirming position in our laws, but the day will come - because in a choice between death and life, life will always win.
Posted by Mark Noonan at May 5, 2006 11:04 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.blogsforbush.com/mt/president.cgi/7079
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Support for Roe Declines:
Donkey Stomp linked with Support for Roe v. Wade Declining
This is an encouraging sign that the American people are coming to understand the terrible impact that abortion has on this country.
[Read More]
Tracked on May 5, 2006 04:08 PM
Comments
But Mark, I thought all polls were biased. Lol!
The numbers you pointed out seem contradictory to me -- 47% oppose Roe yet only 40% are in favor of making it more difficult to get an abortion? What's up with that?
In a perfect world there would be no such thing as an unwanted pregnancy. That is the state I would like to see us strive towards. Abortion is a shameful and disgusting act. But, IMHO, there needs to be a much stronger emphasis on personal responsibility so that they may be prevented BEFORE pregnancy occurs, as well as after it does. Banning abortions may help in and of itself, but it would come at a cost if other issues aren't addressed: things like prevention, abstinence, holding the father accountable as well as the mother, adoption counseling, stuff like that. I am curious as to the demographics of women who seek abortions. Who are they? How old are they? What is their economic status? What are their motivations? Too often people concentrate on the mere fact of abortion without looking behind the reasons it exists.
As is the case with every other issue, to really fix a problem you have to know as much as you can about it. Only then can you attempt a rational solution. To the extent that you go on "gut instinct" alone -- that is, if you engage your heart without also engaging your intellect -- you run the very real risk of creating other problems in your attempt to solve the problem at hand. I'm using the editorial form of "you" here -- not any specific "you".
Posted by: Ricorun at May 5, 2006 11:57 AM
I generally consider myself pro-life, I would like to think that I would not consider abortion in any but the most dire circumstances such as saving the life of my wife. But, I acknowledge that there do, in fact, exist certain circumstances, beyond saving the life of the mother, that abortion must be made available. Take anencephalpy for example. A friend of mine had a baby with this condition. 95% of mothers who have a baby with this condition have an abortion - for good reason. Of the 5% that choose to go to term, like my friend, over half are stillborn. The others last at most a few hours. You say that abortion is a heart-wrenching experience, try watching your baby attempt to breathe - unsuccessfully - and suffocate to death in your arms. I think that would be harder to deal with than an abortion. I know my friends are still dealing with it several years later.
Even if you keep abortions for medical reasons such as these available, what about rape and incest? And what about 14 year-olds getting pregnant? The Pro-life movement will never be able to eliminate abortions because it is not a black-and-white issue, and though I consider myself pro-life I cannot bring myself to support a group whose only expressed solution to reducing the number of abortions is by eliminating abortion.
I think the pro-life movement would be better served by adopting a wider range of eligible-for-abortion criteria, but working harder to provide incentives for mothers of otherwise healthy babies to deliver their children to term. How about easier requirements and financial incentives for adoption, cash incentives for pregnant mothers to bring their babies to term and give them up for adoption, etc. A pro-life movement that supported these things as a means to reduce abortion would garner more universal support from people like me, who would like to reduce abortion but are not willing to eliminate the practice.
Posted by: scotty at May 5, 2006 12:13 PM
Abortions shouldn't be needed today. This is not the 50s or 60s when parents didn't talk about sex and kids didn't know about it, and birth control wasn't easy to get.
Sheesh, kids can march down to the pharmacy on the corner and pick from about 30 different boxes of condoms.
Posted by: MaxC at May 5, 2006 04:29 PM
Um...."made abortions legal during the first three months of pregnancy..."
It made abortions legal at ANY TIME during the pregnancy. Just in case people still don't know.
Posted by: Tim Mo at May 5, 2006 05:26 PM
Harris poll eh... Yeal they are quite trustworthy. And are a Good Christian Right Wing pollster.
I think you see the problem now.
Meanwhile Gallop says 61% support Row and about the same number do not want to restrict it.
Posted by: Master at May 5, 2006 05:34 PM
In the final analysis, Roe doesn't matter.
No one has to have an abortion. It is an option.
If no one chooses that option, the option is moot.
If the only ones choosing the option are "the cultural elite", then the pro-life campaign is working.
I don't like coercion. I say leave the option in place - and make the idea of keeping the baby so appealing that only the coldest of souls would sacrifice their foetus. Roe would be unused insurance in such a society.
Of course, there would be some who would still use the Roe cop-out - but such people are likely to kill their children anyway, either before or after birth.
Posted by: The Small Town hick at May 5, 2006 07:30 PM
Abortion is an abomination. But, all citizens have a right to choice and a right to privacy. Peace
Posted by: steve at May 5, 2006 08:14 PM
The trend over the past ten years on abortion has been decidedly to the pro-life side, particularly among young people (college age and highschool age). What the exact statistics are, I don't recall right now, but the trend is in the right direction and the polls are easily accessed.
Advances in science support the pro-life position and as ultra sound technology becomes better and more widely available, the life in the womb is harder to deny.
What do citizens have a right to choose? To choose to kill in private? Is that really a privacy issue and a legitimate legally sanctioned choice? That makes no sense, IMO.
Posted by: CeCe at May 6, 2006 10:46 AM
And yet:
Only 25 percent of those polled said they believe the precedent should be overturned, while 66 percent said they believe Roe should stand.
You'd think those wishing to reduce the number of abortions would be pushing the use of contraceptions and educating their children about the realities of reproduction. But no, it's abstinense only, stay a virgin til marriage, condoms are murder, slip your daughter into the abortion clinic in between picketing. The real Sin to conservatives is females attempting to take control over the reproductive lives out of God's hands and into their own. How pathetically contradictive.
Posted by: GOPisDying at May 6, 2006 03:59 PM
Oh, and mustn't forget South Dakota's new "have your rapist's baby" law.
Posted by: GOPisDying at May 6, 2006 04:11 PM
Typical garbage spewing from another tolerant pro-choicer!
Posted by: CeCe at May 7, 2006 03:51 PM
Post a comment
But Mark, I thought all polls were biased. Lol!
The numbers you pointed out seem contradictory to me -- 47% oppose Roe yet only 40% are in favor of making it more difficult to get an abortion? What's up with that?
In a perfect world there would be no such thing as an unwanted pregnancy. That is the state I would like to see us strive towards. Abortion is a shameful and disgusting act. But, IMHO, there needs to be a much stronger emphasis on personal responsibility so that they may be prevented BEFORE pregnancy occurs, as well as after it does. Banning abortions may help in and of itself, but it would come at a cost if other issues aren't addressed: things like prevention, abstinence, holding the father accountable as well as the mother, adoption counseling, stuff like that. I am curious as to the demographics of women who seek abortions. Who are they? How old are they? What is their economic status? What are their motivations? Too often people concentrate on the mere fact of abortion without looking behind the reasons it exists.
As is the case with every other issue, to really fix a problem you have to know as much as you can about it. Only then can you attempt a rational solution. To the extent that you go on "gut instinct" alone -- that is, if you engage your heart without also engaging your intellect -- you run the very real risk of creating other problems in your attempt to solve the problem at hand. I'm using the editorial form of "you" here -- not any specific "you".
I generally consider myself pro-life, I would like to think that I would not consider abortion in any but the most dire circumstances such as saving the life of my wife. But, I acknowledge that there do, in fact, exist certain circumstances, beyond saving the life of the mother, that abortion must be made available. Take anencephalpy for example. A friend of mine had a baby with this condition. 95% of mothers who have a baby with this condition have an abortion - for good reason. Of the 5% that choose to go to term, like my friend, over half are stillborn. The others last at most a few hours. You say that abortion is a heart-wrenching experience, try watching your baby attempt to breathe - unsuccessfully - and suffocate to death in your arms. I think that would be harder to deal with than an abortion. I know my friends are still dealing with it several years later.
Even if you keep abortions for medical reasons such as these available, what about rape and incest? And what about 14 year-olds getting pregnant? The Pro-life movement will never be able to eliminate abortions because it is not a black-and-white issue, and though I consider myself pro-life I cannot bring myself to support a group whose only expressed solution to reducing the number of abortions is by eliminating abortion.
I think the pro-life movement would be better served by adopting a wider range of eligible-for-abortion criteria, but working harder to provide incentives for mothers of otherwise healthy babies to deliver their children to term. How about easier requirements and financial incentives for adoption, cash incentives for pregnant mothers to bring their babies to term and give them up for adoption, etc. A pro-life movement that supported these things as a means to reduce abortion would garner more universal support from people like me, who would like to reduce abortion but are not willing to eliminate the practice.
Abortions shouldn't be needed today. This is not the 50s or 60s when parents didn't talk about sex and kids didn't know about it, and birth control wasn't easy to get.
Sheesh, kids can march down to the pharmacy on the corner and pick from about 30 different boxes of condoms.
Um...."made abortions legal during the first three months of pregnancy..."
It made abortions legal at ANY TIME during the pregnancy. Just in case people still don't know.
Harris poll eh... Yeal they are quite trustworthy. And are a Good Christian Right Wing pollster.
I think you see the problem now.
Meanwhile Gallop says 61% support Row and about the same number do not want to restrict it.
In the final analysis, Roe doesn't matter.
No one has to have an abortion. It is an option.
If no one chooses that option, the option is moot.
If the only ones choosing the option are "the cultural elite", then the pro-life campaign is working.
I don't like coercion. I say leave the option in place - and make the idea of keeping the baby so appealing that only the coldest of souls would sacrifice their foetus. Roe would be unused insurance in such a society.
Of course, there would be some who would still use the Roe cop-out - but such people are likely to kill their children anyway, either before or after birth.
Abortion is an abomination. But, all citizens have a right to choice and a right to privacy. Peace
The trend over the past ten years on abortion has been decidedly to the pro-life side, particularly among young people (college age and highschool age). What the exact statistics are, I don't recall right now, but the trend is in the right direction and the polls are easily accessed.
Advances in science support the pro-life position and as ultra sound technology becomes better and more widely available, the life in the womb is harder to deny.
What do citizens have a right to choose? To choose to kill in private? Is that really a privacy issue and a legitimate legally sanctioned choice? That makes no sense, IMO.
And yet:
Only 25 percent of those polled said they believe the precedent should be overturned, while 66 percent said they believe Roe should stand.
You'd think those wishing to reduce the number of abortions would be pushing the use of contraceptions and educating their children about the realities of reproduction. But no, it's abstinense only, stay a virgin til marriage, condoms are murder, slip your daughter into the abortion clinic in between picketing. The real Sin to conservatives is females attempting to take control over the reproductive lives out of God's hands and into their own. How pathetically contradictive.
Oh, and mustn't forget South Dakota's new "have your rapist's baby" law.
Typical garbage spewing from another tolerant pro-choicer!