A Gallup poll released last month found that 51 percent of Americans called themselves pro-life rather than pro-choice — the first time the poll has had a pro-life majority. But that doesn’t mean that a majority want Roe v. Wade overturned. Of those surveyed in a new CBS News/New York Times poll, 62 percent thought that the Roe decision was a good thing and 64 percent didn’t want it overturned.
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/24
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
58 Comments
The Gallup poll showed that views really didn’t change. Despite asking a larger number of Republicans, a number that didn’t represent the national percentage, the number of people who want reproductive freedom with no limitations, and those who want to completely ban all abortion, hadn’t changed.
So it’s no surprise that a follow up poll shows that the majority of Americans are still pro-choice.
Well, duh.
Obviously most Americans with two brain cells to rub together realize that (1) being pregnant is every bit as Serious as humans have realized it is for the past five thousand years or so, and (2) the best decision about any one woman’s pregnancy will be made by — surprise! — the woman who is actually and at this very second as profoundly pregnant as was mentioned in # 1, and not Uncle Sam (or Cousin State either).
This is good news for activists on both sides, btw. In a way, I am hopeful that this issue may finally die the death it so deserves in today’s American culture war.
Ok, that may be an expression of hopeless optimism more than an expression of reality on the ground, but last time I checked hopin’ is still legal.
“but last time I checked hopin’ is still legal.”—Pedant
But it seems like that’s true only if the “hopin’” is done by the liberals. They want to legislate with everyone else, ie. the ‘hate crimes bill’.
Boxlock20
Posted June 21, 2009 at 8:12 am | Permalink
“but last time I checked hopin’ is still legal.”
But it seems like that’s true only if the “hopin’” is done by the liberals. They want to legislate with everyone else, ie. the ‘hate crimes bill’.
—
Of course. They also want to take away your first born son, and send him to San Francisco to grow up in a mission on Market Street and upon becoming a castrati to serve NARAL as the loyal drone slave that’s in his only just future.
See, two can play the cuckoo for cocoa puffs game.
“62 percent thought that the Roe decision was a good thing and 64 percent didn’t want it overturned.”
Oh Phillip!
And the cons had made SO much of that “Gallup poll released last month found that 51 percent of Americans called themselves pro-life rather than pro-choice — the first time the poll has had a pro-life majority.” It was the only good news (aside from the assassination of Dr. Tiller) that they had had in months! And here you come and kick the legs out from under them.
BlueJay sound effects….
WAH wah WAHHHHHHHHHHHH
Maggotpunk,
I am sure you have some proof for any/all of your assertions?
Since you are a proven liar here, I have to ask.
It just goes to show, crafty political monikers, such as “Pro Life” can fool people into choosing that side. Hey if their Pro Life, that must mean Pro Choice is really Pro Death.
Is there a Pro Life Choice???
In the election cycle that happened less than 6 months ago to this poll states across the country turned down all the initiatives offered up that would take away some or all abortion rights in those states. That poll speaks volumes.
I’m just saying………
Killer Tiller really has inspired the McClatchy Group in Kansas.
I thought I was pro-choice but they changed the definition on me and now call me pro-life. Although my position hasn’t changed. I don’t favor abortion but I don’t want it to be illegal either.
Nobody ever favors abortion. At least not anymore than people favor having an appendectomy.
I fall in with the majority of citizens with the position that abortion is useful in cases of medical emergencies, incest and rape. I do draw the line however, using abortion as a common birth control method. But, that said, that’s my opinion, and I don’t get a vote on the matter. :)
“At least not anymore than people favor having an appendectomy.”
The procedure is very similiar. Reach in with a large pair of pliars, pull the baby through the birth canal so it’s head is peeking just inside the mothers body. Cracking open the babies skull with the effort of cracking snow crab, and then suctioning out the babies brain. Once the life is sucked out, it is a simple matter of using the extraction tool to disect the baby into manageable pieces and pulling them out of the woman and dumping them into a special waste collector.
“and I don’t get a vote on the matter.”
You don’t get to vote for you state elected officials who make state laws?
The poll shows the ignorance of the American people, programmed by the pro-abortion media, in their lack of understanding of how Roe v. Wade and the companion Doe v. Bolton edicts legalized the mangling, dismembering, poisoning, and beheading of living human babies throughout all 9 months of a pregnancy, including partial-birth and live-birth abortions. A handful of unelected, unaccountable, leftist, activist, baby-hating federal judges struck down state laws enacted by elected lawmakers to restrict these contract killings.
This is not the rule of law, and the USofA is not a nation of laws while such violent, barbaric brutality is allowed to profitably continue.
#
American_Way
Posted June 21, 2009 at 10:54 am | Permalink
“and I don’t get a vote on the matter.”
You don’t get to vote for you state elected officials who make state laws?
———————————–
Since it’s an elective medical procedure and I’m not a female, and it’s been declared by the Supreme Court as legal under specific guidelines – no, I don’t get a vote.
I can voice my concern via legislatures in my own state about procedures and restrictions. However, there is a minimal interaction of what I think and what actually occurs.
All that anger gonna burn you up parkay.
BlueJay sings….
Burn baby burn!
BJ,
LOL, as if you are one to be talking about anger? Little man?
“Of those surveyed in a new CBS News/New York Times poll, 62 percent thought that the Roe decision was a good thing and 64 percent didn’t want it overturned.”
That is razor thin on two thirds.
Two thirds is “that’s just the way it is” territory when it comes to convention thinking.
So clearly, you “pro life” folks are not only losing ground you are running out of time.
I can tell you why. Not that you’ll listen.
You don’t do anything to ENCOURAGE pro life choices. You just say, “there IS no choice!”. That message is off putting, as we can see.
When you are into “that’s just the way it is” territory, you have to impress people with NEW ideas that prove that you are honest in your motives.
LOL….
Until we start looking at all the other issues like federal funding for abortion… late term abortion… abortion on demand… etc…
Then all of a sudden the majority of people are in agreement with the Pro-Life side even though they don’t favor overturning Roe v Wade.
There’s a good “for instance”.
Nobody should have to apologize or be ashamed of having an abortion. Abortion on demand should be the rule.
Amway continues his lies about how abortions are performed today. But I never expect the antis to be truthful.
And Parkay? Well, we know what a liar he is.
Five years ago while living in St. Louis, I paid a visit to my prescribing physician, as was my wont every three months. During that incendiary summer, long-dormant feelings surfaced.
It is important to note that I had, by then, been consulting this physician for six years. He knew my medical history – it was there in writing. Yet he never mentioned my abortion. He knew I wasn’t promiscuous; he knew I was more chaste (at least in practice) than a Druid priestess.
Yet he never mentioned it – until I did. Obviously, I asked him what his opinions were.
I will not elaborate here; suffice it to say that certain words weren’t used. “Am I a (that awful “m” word)?” I asked.
“#$%^ no!” he retorted. (My dashing physician was only one year older than his tallest patient, and his language had the same, shall we say, forthrightness, as mine.)
Yet other things became clear: He was probably post-abortive himself; he had seen an actual abortion being performed; his views had changed dramatically since his youth.
As have mine.
Yet I will not repeat what his views actually were. I agree with them, at least as it pertains to myself, but I will not repeat them. I have no right to offend and/or hurt others.
But this much was clear: The good doc didn’t want me (or other women) imprisoned. He didn’t use the “m” word. He did, however, highly approve of my own vow to never have another abortion.
He didn’t want to have another one, either – and he was very graphic about how he and his missus avoided another pregnancy. In fact, I turned beet-red, as I recall.
Significantly, he stated that he had seen many women like myself – uncondemning of others yet pained by their own history.
Does that equate to judgements of others – much less of a recently-murdered, much-loved physician who exercised that greatest of Christian virtues (forgiveness)?
Probably not.
The lying Nazi whines,
“Maggotpunk,
I am sure you have some proof for any/all of your assertions?
Since you are a proven liar here, I have to ask.”
Coming from the guy who never supports any of his claims. This one is simple Nathan, you simply do a couple things. You compare the results of this poll to previous ones and you compare the percentage of people queried with registered voter data. I know, this sort of thing is above you since statistics is taught at a high school level.
Funny how pro-choice folks are now all about polls, but Roe shoved abortion down voters throats.
And it remains the law of the land. The only way at this point to reduce abortions is to change hearts and minds. You do that by educating moms as to what they are really doing when they abort their child. The science is able to demonstrate more and more the humanity of the child in the womb. The more this is shown the harder it becomes to abort. Which is the way it should be.
FilmFan,
This is none of my business but still, you DO realize don’t you that you are the ONLY one of any importance that seems unable to or won’t forgive you?
If you feel you need forgiveness just ask the only one that matters and know it’s been done. No, you won’t forget, but let it go knowing it’s forgiven and forgotten.
“but Roe shoved abortion down voters throats. ”
It did? How many abortions have members of your family been forced to undergo? Watch? Hear about?
The closest an abortion can come to affecting another person would be if the biological father were against it. How rare do you think that is?
“You do that by educating moms as to what they are really doing when they abort their child. ”
So, lay a guilt trip on them? Where are you gonna be after the birth? PROBABLY condemning the same women for being single mothers. Why not use of your resources to actually help such women or at least vote that society should?
“but Roe shoved abortion down voters throats. ”
Forced abortions? Not likely.
Shoved down voters throats? Like allowing blacks to attend public schools.
What other comparisons do you want to draw?
Don’t like abortion? Don’t have one.
Christians object to abortions because we believe them to be the snuffing out of life of an unborn child. It isn’t just a matter of not liking them, we see that our neighbor’s children are being lost.
I’m am using the term “neighbor” in the Biblical sense from the story of the Good Samaritan. It is not that I “know” my next door neighbor is having an abortion, but my neighbors-Kansans are doing something beyond foolish-they are putting an end to their offspring.
I got an offspring Deb. I chose life.
Damn but he eats a lot. Can ya help?
BlueJay
Posted June 21, 2009 at 10:56 pm | Permalink
I got an offspring Deb. I chose life.
Damn but he eats a lot. Can ya help?
————–
Who’s kid is it BJ?
If it’s yours, you raise it.
Novel concept.
It takes a village “Jim”.
Folks like you only remember that when personally threatened or ..worried about people we make angry on the other side of the planet.
If it’s your war, you fight it. Novel concept.
I think the point JR is making is that these ‘neighbors’ are only neighbors until they give birth, then you’re on your own.
The big hypocrisy of the right.
Some really don’t need another mouth to feed. Some just don’t have enough responsibility to handle a child.
Political_Mama,
Do you support allowing parents to kill their 5 year olds because:
“Some really don’t need another mouth to feed. Some just don’t have enough responsibility to handle a child.”
Should we use that excuse to kill anyone at anytime regardless of age?
Nathan,
Well, it sounds more humane that your solution of just letting them starve.
Jed,
I must have missed where I said my solution was letting them starve.
You might as well not even bother responding to me if you are going to argue about things I have not even said.
Nathan,
Do I need to do a bone-dig on all the times you’ve complained about welfare?
Jed,
Bone-dig all you want. You will not find anywhere that I have said that my solution is to just let someone starve.
So the solution is let them starve or kill them, Jed?
BlueJay, if your child is hungry send him over to be fed at my house. We are already feeding quite a few children on one income. My husband an I both work hard along with our children. The oldest have jobs while they are attending college.
Yes, I care about children after birth, which is why I volunteer to help children quite a few hours a month through a youth organization. In fact, many Christians give their time and money supporting birthed children both here and overseas.
Deb,
The question isn’t how many you help, it’s how many you don’t help. Your piecemeal approach lets far too many children (and often parents) go hungry. When children, especially young ones go without proper nutrition, the result can be lack of brain development that affects their ability to ever have a life.
Other elements of poverty also affect children. We currently have about 200,000 chidren in the system who will age out never having known a loving, secure family. When they start having children, they will have absolutely none of the experiences that allowed most of us to raise our children, and the problem compounds itself. If you really want to do something useful, start a campaign to find qualified adoptive parents who will provide them with the loving and secure homes they need, and break their cycle of poverty and abuse. Who knows, your church might even get some converts in the process.
The decision to undergo an abortion is never an easy one. There are numerous factors that need to be considered—no woman volunteers to be a part of this incredibly difficult or thinks lightly of this decision. Each woman, however, faced with this decision, would come to a different conclusion, but in the end, it is their right to decide, not the government’s.
At Republican Majority for Choice, we found that these poll results confirmed what we have always believed: that the decision to undergo an abortion is a difficult one, but one the government cannot control. RMC has long championed looking beyond the terms “pro-choice,” and “pro-life.” For example, someone who would never consider undergoing an abortion could be classified as “pro-life,” but may still believe that it is a decision that should be left to the woman, not the State. These terms, themselves, seem to divide, not to unite the two groups who basically have the same goal: to lower the number of abortions performed each year. At RMC, we support the use of the terms “pro-choice” and “anti-choice” because no one is truly anti-life, but millions do believe in limiting government intrusion in reproductive health decisions.
Jed, I agree with you that there are many children growing up today without the benefit of a loving family. Even families that attempt to do a good job sometimes fail. Yes, Christians along with their churches need to do more adoption.
I’m pretty sure that we disagree in that I believe that abortion is wrong because it takes a human life regardless of whether every child is helped. Right and wrong must not be decided on the basis of pragmatics.
Deb,
Right and wrong are always decided on the basis of pragmatics. All our laws, including biblical laws are based in pragmatism. Why else would the murder of a child be condemned, but the killing of many thousands of children in Iraq or Afghanistan be dismissed by most of you good christians as “collateral damage?” Pragmatics is where the world lives.
CommonSenseRepublican
Posted June 22, 2009 at 11:50 am | Permalink
The decision to undergo an abortion is never an easy one. There are numerous factors that need to be considered—no woman volunteers to be a part of this incredibly difficult or thinks lightly of this decision. Each woman, however, faced with this decision, would come to a different conclusion, but in the end, it is their right to decide, not the government’s.
At Republican Majority for Choice, we found that these poll results confirmed what we have always believed: that the decision to undergo an abortion is a difficult one, but one the government cannot control. RMC has long championed looking beyond the terms “pro-choice,” and “pro-life.” For example, someone who would never consider undergoing an abortion could be classified as “pro-life,” but may still believe that it is a decision that should be left to the woman, not the State. These terms, themselves, seem to divide, not to unite the two groups who basically have the same goal: to lower the number of abortions performed each year. At RMC, we support the use of the terms “pro-choice” and “anti-choice” because no one is truly anti-life, but millions do believe in limiting government intrusion in reproductive health decisions.
—
Heads up, Kansas GOP.
THIS is how you win hearts and minds.
Jed: Innocent children are the avowed target in an abortion. Killing the children is the whole point of the procedure.
When children are killed in war, it was not, the point of the mission. If the mission could have been accomplished without that killing, then sincere efforts would have been made to do it that way.
Of course the majority don’t want Roe overturned. Pro-choice IS Pro-life. Those who claim the ‘Pro-life’ label as it is commonly known these days are absolutely NOT pro-life in a literal sense of the word. What they really are is against women’s emancipation and freedom to decide when/if/how they give birth to children. Aborting a fetus is not the same thing as killing a child, as they would like you to think. It’s reproductive health care and most people support reprouctive health care.
Logos: noun Theology.
the Word of God, or principle of divine reason and creative order, identified in the Gospel of John with the second person of the Trinity incarnate in Jesus Christ.
I’m a little surprised at your moniker. Perhaps you are using the second definition: the principle of reason judgment, associated with the animus.
I am definitely pro-woman, pro-man, pro-baby and pro-life. I am against snuffing out the lives of God’s image bearers in the womb.
It is interesting that you speak of reproductive health care. Reproductive health care should have to do with people reproducing, not aborting.
Deb, thank God the constitution forbids you imposing your religious interpretation on the rest of us.
You are not pro-woman, you just believe that women are nothing more than incubators. Reproductive health care is all encompassing of a woman’s reproductive health, including NOT reproducing.
Killing children is not the target. Allowing women to CHOOSE when they become mothers is.
And Nathan, NO I do not support killing those who are actually alive.
I agree with you both, “Political_mama” and “Nathaniel” –
But most 13-year-olds seem to be asking for it.
Deb,
Tell that to the children of Dresden. Dresden was not a military target. It was also arguably the most beautiful city in Europe. We bombed it with thousands of tons of incindiary bombs and burned the city and its people to ash in revenge for the London blitz. We did exactly the same thing to Japanese cities, indiscriminately targeting civilian sectors. Hundreds of thousands of children were burned alive with napalm and phosphorus. This is just exactly the definition of terrorism.
All this is awful, but there is worse. These children died and it was over. What’s worse is when children are abused so horrifically and systematically that they are permanently damaged and become abusers and torturers themselves. in such cases, abortion is preferable to continuing a generational contagion of abuse. Ideally, there would be other ways to break that chain, but we don’t live in an ideal world and never will. Abortions will always be necessary for one reason or another. If you force it to become illegal, ot will make no difference except to kill women too. Please climb down from that steeple you live in and discover the real world. Up close is a whole lot different.
Mornin’ Jed… You’re up early… Me, I forgot to send out some emails before I went to bed… Hope you have a good day!!
Hi Chas,
Actually I’m still up- spent the last 3wks taking almost 700 photos and I’m trying to get the Photoshop post-processing done before I go shoot a bunch more next week. I probably ought to save some of those for next winter when a warm picture would be welcome.
A new study (2005) published in the medical journal Acta Paediatrica has found that women who have had an abortion are 2.4 times more likely to physically abuse their children.
The results showed that women with a history of one induced abortion were 2.4 times more likely to physically abuse their children than women who had not had an abortion.
“Deb” cheers us up this morning with –
“…women who have had an abortion are 2.4 times more likely to physically abuse their children.”
So maybe they’re not likely Mother-of-the-Year material?
I’m stunned.
Mostly, I’m stunned how advocates of illegal abortion view such numbers as a reason to enforce motherhood on women.
Moneyhawk, your ability to deliberately twist ideas into propaganda is astounding.
These are real people, with real lives. Women who get abortions must live with the consequences. There may be physical after effects in additional to the emotional trauma of having their cervix artificially opened and a human life removed.
Abortion is a convenience for men. It is a huge risk for women. Of course it is death for the babies. I’m at a loss to understand what happened to the hearts of those who promote the snuffing out of INNOCENT lives.
Deb, an egg is not a chicken!