Jivin J’s Life Links 5-23-11
by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat
- The latest results from Gallup show that for the first time in 2 years, the percentage saying they are “pro-choice” was greater than those saying they were “pro-life.”
However, 51% of Americans view abortion as morally wrong and 61% of Americans think abortion should be legal in either no or only in a few circumstances. Interestingly, 18-34s were the likeliest group to describe abortion as morally wrong and think abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. They were also the group that most likely felt abortion should be legal in all circumstances.
- LifeNews just noticed this information in a Telegraph story from April about President Barack Obama’s father:Mr. Obama Sr. and Miss Dunham divorced in January 1964, by which time he had left Hawaii and was studying for a PhD in Economics at Harvard.
The file said 2 months later, concerns were raised over Mr. Obama Sr.’s relationship with a Kenyan high-school student on an exchange scheme in nearby Boston, who abruptly travelled to England.
“The suspicion exists,” the March 1964 document said, “that she may have gone to London for [redacted]”. It is unclear what the next word is. At the time, abortions were illegal in the US.
- The New York Times notes how the Obama administration isn’t pleased with Indiana’s law defunding Planned Parenthood and are trying to decide how to proceed:The changes in Indiana are subject to federal review and approval, and administration officials have made it clear they will not approve the changes in the form adopted by the state. Federal officials have 90 days to act but may feel pressure to act sooner because Indiana is already enforcing its law, which took effect on May 10, and because legislators in other states are working on similar measures.
- Apparently, a bunch of big-league pitchers want the same adult stem cell procedure Bartolo Colon received.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I think the most relevant findings of the poll for this site are that (1) only 22% want abortion banned in all circumstances, which I have been assured here is the “true” pro-life position, (2) younger adults are not becoming significantly more pro-life and are in fact slightly more liberal on the issue than older adults are, and (3) the numbers support the contention I’ve made a number of times that for most people, it’s quite possible to consider something immoral–even very much so–and yet want it to remain legal.
I guess I’ll be the one to bite at Joan’s post, since no one else has.
1.) I can’t speak for everyone, but few pro-lifers would make a woman give birth if it kills her.
2.) Why don’t you click through the links? If you had, you would have noticed that Gallup linked to an earlier poll of theirs which blankly stated “Americans Aged 18 – 29 trending more anti-abortion”, which kind of throws a monkey wrench into your whole assertion that “younger adults are not becoming significantly more pro-life”.
3.) If you ignore the fact that legal in most/all, which is what most pro-choicers argue for, trails far behind illegal in most/all, which is most pro-lifers argue for, then I suppose one could say that you’re right.
I thought this poll result was really interesting – though people claim to be “pro-choice,” it’s very clear that they support making abortion ILLEGAL almost across the board. By 61%!!
Sounds like a case of “well, I don’t like people thinking I’m closed-minded by calling myself ‘pro-life’ so I’ll say I’m ‘pro-choice,’ but in reality, abortion kills children and it should be illegal in all but a few cases” (which are most likely the standard “rape, incest, life of the mother.”)
I’d say this trends in favor of the pro-life position.
I wonder how many of those polled would agree with joan’s “Yay for China’s forced abortion policy!” and “Down with the disabled!” mentality…
Joan the poll said that only 38% of the population agrees with the pro-choice position that abortion should be legal in any/most cases. That is the statistic that you should be focusing on as a pro-choice person. Your position is not the majority.
The poll also states that 60% think abortion should either never be legal or legal in only a few circumstances (definitely not a pro-choice position). Another words, they don’t agree w/Roe v Wade which allows abortions for all reasons ALL circumstances.
Do you realize that before Roe v. Wade, there was ALWAYS an exception for the life of the mother? So even if we returned to life before Roe v Wade, abortion would be allowed in that circumstance!
And it is interesting to hear a pro-choice person condescend to inform me of what the ‘true’ pro-life position is. As I often tell the young adults I talk to, “If I am unable to convince u that abortion is wrong even in the case of rape, u are still pro-life. U are pro-life with exceptions.”
I have had many people I know who identify as “pro-life” and even volunteer w/me for pro-life tell me that they are for exceptions of rape and life of the mother.
And as for ur comment about the youth not being more pro-life, you might be interested to note what NARAL had to say about that after they conducted their own research study on this very issue. http://www.newsweek.com/2010/04/15/remember-roe.html there is the link.
“it’s very clear that they support making abortion ILLEGAL almost across the board. By 61%!!” – selective interpretation! It actually said “61% of Americans think abortion should be legal in either no or only in a few circumstances” – so what are those ‘few circumstances’? When the life of the woman is under threat? When it would cause excessive economic hardship? To some is it just because the woman really, really wants to abort?
18 – 29 year olds? Would some of those be the ones who haven’t yet faced circumstances where they may decide that abortion isn’t such a bad option after all?
Reality “18 – 29 year olds? Would some of those be the ones who haven’t yet faced circumstances where they may decide that abortion isn’t such a bad option after all”
What exactly is ur point? That because some people opt for abortion who previously thought of it as a bad thing illustrates why abortion should be legal?
How is your example any different than the kids who go through the DARE program? They know how dangerous and unhealthy drugs are UNTIL they get to high school or even college. There for the first time they experience peer pressure and temptation. and decide to try drugs.
I am also reminded of boys who experience their moms being assaulted by boyfriends or husbands. They will often talk of how horrible it was to hear that happen and know it was happening. Yet many of them when they get older become abusers themselves.
So I guess I’m not clear on your point.
“What exactly is ur(sic) point? ‘ – (what, are we texting here?) – that many 18-29 year olds will change their minds, that’s all. So to declare that they are committed anti-choicers is a bit pre-emptive.
“18 – 29 year olds? Would some of those be the ones who haven’t yet faced circumstances where they may decide that abortion isn’t such a bad option after all”
So let me get this straight the only person who can be a committed pro-lifer is someone who has experienced an unplanned pregnancy and has chosen life? Is that right-because they might change their mind?
Do you also apply this logic to pro-choice young women who thought of abortion as fine until they had one?
Interesting numbers. My unofficial, and most likely to be thrashed thoughts:
– I wonder if the GOP attack at the state level on pro-choice issues has wakened the populace a bit – pro-choice up 7%, pro-life down 6% in two years. If not that reason, would be interested to hear theories.
– Gains in the last two years for pro-lifers in the “illegal in all cases” – though still down from the 10 year highs. I think in regards to this board and the general views, I would think that this 27% is what people on this board would consider “pro-life”. I’m thinking the other 72% would be considered pro-choice. The only carrot is if some people voted “legal under certain”, meaning that only in the life or death of a mother.
– Frustrated by the lack of definition of “a few”. I’d like to see a nice and simple poll – allowable in the first tri, second tri, third tri. My guess? 70/40/5 on support. I would hope that the five would be lower, but crazies exist.
– 27% of Democrats are pro-life. 28% of Republicans are pro-choice. I find both numbers interesting…would like to see them historically.
“Frustrated by the lack of definition of “a few”. I’d like to see a nice and simple poll – allowable in the first tri, second tri, third tri”
I agree. I would add questions like, “do u think abortion should be permitted after the presence of a heart beat?” and “Do u think abortion should be permitted after brain waves can be measured?” etc.
My guess is that most people would be against abortion after a heart beat (24days). But then most folks I find don’t realize that the unborn baby has a beating heart by 24 days or brainwaves by 45days.
Therein lies the job of pro-lifers among others.
I think that perhaps the only question that could come anywhere near being at all conclusive, and even then still subject to change, is:
“are there any circumstances at all under which you would have an abortion?”
If the question was:
Do you believe it is okay to take the life of a human being with a heartbeat, fingers, toes, arms, legs and detectable brain waves through various methods including cutting the body to pieces or sucking the body out of a protected area?
How many would answer YES to that?
Reality: “I think that perhaps the only question that could come anywhere near being at all conclusive, and even then still subject to change, is:
“are there any circumstances at all under which you would have an abortion?”
and then if they said, “no”, you would respond with your previous statement:
Reality “Would some of those be the ones who haven’t yet faced circumstances where they may decide that abortion isn’t such a bad option after all”
u r using circular reasoning.
could come anywhere near being at all conclusive, and even then still subject to change
read and comprehend Kris! My point is that there are no poll questions that provide conclusive, fixed responses. But maybe my question has the potential to be clearer than ‘in a few circumstances’. But even that’s open to conjecture :-)
“How many would answer YES to that?” – probably less than 50% Liz, but it poses the question in an emotional way. People will repond emotionally. And then when they find themselves with an unwanted pregnancy…..
You know what’s really interesting, too? It’s almost like Reality (et.al.) rejoices in the fact that some people “respond emotionally” rather than intellectually when faced with an unplanned pregnancy. Do you rejoice in the fact that some women make the decision to abort hastily and without full disclosure? Is that a desirable situation, in your opinion?
I would think that this 27% is what people on this board would consider “pro-life”. I’m thinking the other 72% would be considered pro-choice.
I kinda doubt that. I was among the “pro-lifers with exceptions” crowd for a while. And I was never “pro-choice.” I’m sure there are many more like me out there.
Frustrated by the lack of definition of “a few”. I’d like to see a nice and simple poll – allowable in the first tri, second tri, third tri. My guess? 70/40/5 on support. I would hope that the five would be lower, but crazies exist.
Yeah. Many of them are right here on this board.
I would add questions like, “do u think abortion should be permitted after the presence of a heart beat?” and “Do u think abortion should be permitted after brain waves can be measured?” etc.
Maybe someone should suggest this to Gallup. I’d be interested to see the results.
And Reality, you’re aware that included in that 61% majority are people who believe in no exceptions, as well. In other words, pro-life – with or without exceptions (which in my opinion are probably the usual suspects, as I said: rape, incest, life of mother) – are the majority of the respondents.
People will repond emotionally. And then when they find themselves with an unwanted pregnancy…..
If their core values are that abortion takes an innocent human life, then they will most likely suffer major longtime regret if they respond to their unwanted pregnancy emotionally (according to fear). Do you want to feel pride about being right in your point that some who are opposed to abortion will give in because of fear/anxiety, or be there to support them and help them make the decision they truly believe is right?
It should be the job of those who care about the woman in a crisis pregnancy to support her, help her see beyond her short-term difficult circumstances, to what she really believes about the life inside of her and about what’s right.
Hi Kel.
“It’s almost like Reality (et.al.) rejoices in the fact that some people “respond emotionally” rather than intellectually when faced with an unplanned pregnancy.” – no, I accept the reality that a number of people make their choices (not just on abortion) like that. Your need to posit that I may ‘rejoice’ is indicative of an emotional response on your behalf.
“Do you rejoice in the fact that some women make the decision to abort hastily and without full disclosure?” – nup. Don’t much like it when they are misinformed or beguiled by anyone with an agenda.
“I was among the “pro-lifers with exceptions” crowd for a while. And I was never “pro-choice.” – if you allow exceptions, isn’t that allowing choice?
“you’re aware that included in that 61% majority are people who believe in no exceptions, as well” – of course, but how many?
In other words, if people truly care about women, they should be about helping them get past their initial shock/fear, to where they can receive information about what abortion does. Then they can make an unhurried decision based more on what information they receive and what they really believe about the person growing inside of them.
Reality did u ever notice that ur points change and “evolve” shall we say over the course of the responses u get to ur posts. It looks to me like when ur original point is shown to be illogical, u simply shift and change ur point. Very interesting to watch.
Demonstrate that then Kris, don’t just sit there and attempt to void salient points.
I’ve said the results are inconclusive because there are too many variables. I proposed a question which may – and I did say may – reduce some of those variables.
Kel asked if I was “aware that included in that 61% majority are people who believe in no exceptions, as well.” – to which I responded “of course, but how many?” because we don’t know.
Where is the ‘evolving’? Or are you just not happy that I counter every new little point and twist of the tale that you throw up?
“If the question was:
Do you believe it is okay to take the life of a human being with a heartbeat, fingers, toes, arms, legs and detectable brain waves through various methods including cutting the body to pieces or sucking the body out of a protected area?
How many would answer YES to that?”
And if the question was “do you believe the government should use its police powers to forcibly prevent a woman from terminating an unwanted pregnancy that she is not emotionally, physically or financially prepared for?”, how many people would answer yes to that? Obviously the wording of a polling question is going to influence its responses, especially from people that don’t feel that strongly about the issue to begin with.
All anyone has to do is go back and read ur previous posts and make up their own minds as to whether or not u change and “evolve” ur arguments. But at ur request I will explain;
First u posted this: “18 – 29 year olds? Would some of those be the ones who haven’t yet faced circumstances where they may decide that abortion isn’t such a bad option after all?”
So youth cannot be fully considered pro-life because they haven’t yet experienced unplanned pregnancy and once they do may opt for abortion. Then u say…
“What exactly is ur(sic) point? ‘ – (what, are we texting here?) – that many 18-29 year olds will change their minds, that’s all. So to declare that they are committed anti-choicers is a bit pre-emptive.”
So now the problem is not that pro-life youth haven’t yet experienced unplanned pregnancy and may change their minds on abortion. Now the problem is that they are just young and may change their minds as they would about anything else.
then it morphs into: “I think that perhaps the only question that could come anywhere near being at all conclusive, and even then still subject to change, is:
“are there any circumstances at all under which you would have an abortion?”
U want to ask the same kids this question after u just said u couldn’t trust what they told the pollsters because kids just change their minds so darn much. I point out that u r using circular reasoning and u respond…
“My point is that there are no poll questions that provide conclusive, fixed responses.” Now it’s not even about youth anymore. It’s just u just don’t trust any polls?……
OMG!
Also from Gallup:
“Do you think marriages between same-sex couples should or should not be recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriages?”
Should be valid – 53%
Should not be valid – 45%
“I was among the “pro-lifers with exceptions” crowd for a while. And I was never “pro-choice.” – if you allow exceptions, isn’t that allowing choice?
Do you believe the position of “I am against abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or life of the mother” to be pro-choice?
“Do you rejoice in the fact that some women make the decision to abort hastily and without full disclosure?” – nup. Don’t much like it when they are misinformed or beguiled by anyone with an agenda.
Are ultrasounds and information on fetal development “beguiling” and “misinformation” in your opinion?
Oh, good, Reality. Since you support the rights of anyone to marry, surely you’ll support the rights of the unborn to merely live. Right?
Reality “My point is that there are no poll questions that provide conclusive, fixed responses.”
Except….. the Gallup poll about same sex marriage.
Kris…..Kris. Let me go through this clearly with you.
“haven’t yet faced circumstances where they may decide that abortion isn’t such a bad option after all?” and “will change their minds, that’s all. So to declare that they are committed anti-choicers is a bit pre-emptive.” are both reasons for questioning the validity in regards to 18-29 year olds. Neither negates the other. they are both valid reasons.
“So now the problem is not that pro-life youth haven’t yet experienced unplanned pregnancy and may change their minds on abortion. Now the problem is that they are just young and may change their minds as they would about anything else.” – no, not at all. They are two problems and there may well be more. Again, neither negates the other. There can be more than one reason for most things/choices/acts you know.
“then it morphs into” – no morphing. That statement was in regard to the generic aspect of the overall poll. And if you read it again – maybe two or three time may be worthwhile – you’ll see that I included “and even then still subject to change“.
So what I have said is that young people may change their minds for a number of reasons and that no poll question will deliver an iron-clad unchanging response over time.
There is no circular reasoning. There are multiple reasons for things. There was no “evolving” (although the points being argued evolved), there was resonding to different aspects and elements raised by others as the discussion progressed.
I made no comment whatsoever, in any way, shape or form, on the gallup poll re same-sex marriage. Now did I?
Is it that your demonstrated inability to write complete words is analagous of your thinking and reasoning or can you simply not keep up as a conversation varies?
Kel,
“Do you believe the position of “I am against abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or life of the mother” to be pro-choice?” – yes, because you are saying that you agree to the woman being allowed to choose whether she keeps her fetus or not. You are not saying that they must or must not abort.
“Are ultrasounds and information on fetal development “beguiling” and “misinformation” in your opinion?” – ultrasounds, I’d like to think not. Info on fetal development, sometimes. But they are not the only situations in which beguiling and misinformation can take place.
I support the rights of women to live Kel, how they best see fit.
“Is it that your demonstrated inability to write complete words is analagous of your thinking and reasoning or can you simply not keep up as a conversation varies?”
I am not unable to write complete words. It’s called I’m in a hurry and I choose not to. I’m pro-choice about abbreviating. :) I didn’t realize I was being graded by u.
And just a tip-hurling insults doesn’t translate into a coherent argument on your part. It just makes u look desperate.
“Are ultrasounds and information on fetal development “beguiling” and “misinformation” in your opinion?” – ultrasounds, I’d like to think not. Info in fetal development, sometimes. But they are not the only situations in which beguiling and misinformation can take place.
So, what are the other situations where “beguiling and misinformation” can take place?
Kel,
“Do you believe the position of “I am against abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or life of the mother” to be pro-choice?” – yes, because you are saying that you agree to the woman being allowed to choose whether she keeps her fetus or not. You are not saying that they must or must not abort.
You are saying they must not abort except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the mother’s life. Is that then the pro-choice position? I find that interesting. I also find that pro-choicers in society are not satisfied with the “no abortions except in cases of rape, incest, mother’s life” position. Are you satisfied with that position?
Since you do not believe ultrasounds to be beguiling/misinforming, do you support laws in which a woman is to be offered the chance to view an ultrasound and receive an accurate, detailed description of fetal development by a physician?
Out of curiosity, what sort of information on fetal development do you find to be misleading?
I do apologise Kris. Despite my own lack of vernacular perfection I have always been a bit of a pedant when it comes to the written word. I support your choice to write in such a manner if you think it assists you timewise.
But I can assure you I am not desperate. Once again, the pedant in me is provoked when people seem unable to ‘accurately’ represent and respond to what I have said.
Kel, your question was ““Do you believe the position of “I am against abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or life of the mother” to be pro-choice?” – to which I replied yes, for the reasons given. This in no way suggest that I am saying “they must not abort except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the mother’s life”. How did you draw such a conclusion?
“no abortions except in cases of rape, incest, mother’s life” position. Are you satisfied with that position?” – no I am not. Again, how did you get there?
“offered the chance” – yes. Forced to – no. Women can already request an ultrasound to view, why would we need a law to enforce what already is permissable?
A number of claims made about fetal development by anti-choicers are spurious, unproven, still under scientific debate or just plain false. Those arguments have taken place on this site. As have those about some of the ‘wordplay’, delayed test results, invocations and other semi-psychological tools used by anti-choice facilities.
The young ones that are not yet pro-life have lived their short lives expsed to Planned Parenthood and the lies they spread while pushing their drugs and promiscuity on our youth. That wil be a lrge segment soon to be pro-life once they are exposed to the truth.
When something is dying it may experience a rally. A rally looks like the creature is going to start to recover, but it’s just the pre-death spike in activity. Then it dies. The tolerance of abortion is such a thing. Abortion itself is beginning to die. Abortion will become just a terrible memory. Sooner than our trolls think.
I don’t care if people don’t like the label of pro-life. But I do see a more pro-life culture emerging.
Kris: The poll also states that 60% think abortion should either never be legal or legal in only a few circumstances (definitely not a pro-choice position). Another words, they don’t agree w/Roe v Wade which allows abortions for all reasons ALL circumstances.
The Roe decision is there, sure, but it’s really the state laws that address the circumstances. If states want to restrict abortion later in gestation, as with viability, Roe is fine with that.
I haven’t seen a recent poll on it, but even among pro-choicers I don’t think a majority favors abortion “for any reason” after a point in gestation.
Reality: 18 – 29 year olds? Would some of those be the ones who haven’t yet faced circumstances where they may decide that abortion isn’t such a bad option after all?
Sure, of course, and some of them will go from pro-choice to pro-life, as well. Younger people tend to think more in black and white, and thus we see the most polarization there, i.e. the most who think “should be illegal in all situations” and “should be legal in all situations.”
Kel, your question was ““Do you believe the position of “I am against abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or life of the mother” to be pro-choice?” – to which I replied yes, for the reasons given. This in no way suggest that I am saying “they must not abort except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the mother’s life”. How did you draw such a conclusion?
“no abortions except in cases of rape, incest, mother’s life” position. Are you satisfied with that position?” – no I am not. Again, how did you get there?
My point was that true pro-choicers would not be satisfied with the position of “no abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or life of the mother.” So, to classify that position as “pro-choice” is disingenuous.
If society condones killing a child because his father is a rapist, shall it also execute the father who is the rapist?
“Abortion itself is beginning to die. Abortion will become just a terrible memory. Sooner than our trolls think.” – once contraception and fertilization intervention become pretty much perfected and freely available everywhere abortion will shrink to an infinitesimal number. So it would make sense to support medical research and contraception programs. Until then…
“Sure, of course, and some of them will go from pro-choice to pro-life, as well.” – I agree Doug.
Kel, if you are agreeing that someone is free to terminate in some circumstances then you are allowing choice. This would make you pro-choice. Some are more pro-choice than others.
Kel: My point was that true pro-choicers would not be satisfied with the position of “no abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or life of the mother.” So, to classify that position as “pro-choice” is disingenuous.
Kel, does it necessarily entail “without exception”? After all, from what I’ve seen, more than half of those who are generally “pro-life” would make exception for rape, and some for incest, danger to the woman, etc.
Without specifically mentioning every applicable situation, lots of people are still generally “pro-life” or “pro-choice” as far as the overall issue.
Kel, does it necessarily entail “without exception”?
Are you referring to being “pro-choice without exception” or “pro-life without exception?”
After all, from what I’ve seen, more than half of those who are generally “pro-life” would make exception for rape, and some for incest, danger to the woman, etc.
I don’t know about more than half, but a large number do, yes. And they are considered pro-life, since they likely view rape, incest, and life-threatening conditions as things which the mother had no control over. They would be against about 97% of all abortions.
Kel, for both pro-lifers and pro-choicers.
Just as most pro-lifers (IMO, anyway) are in favor of exceptions as you note, let’s look at pro-choicers who favor abortion to viability, but not afterward. Without checking, I can’t remember the exact figures, but I’m sure it’s at least 97% of abortions that occur before that time in the US.
Doug, if you draw the line at viability, then you are very likely in the minority of the pro-choice camp.
Those who argue bodily autonomy, in particular, care little for the viability argument.
Kel, perhaps “the minority,” yeah, but if anything I’d say that’s because other people draw the line earlier, as well as later. Looking at it as, “what percentage of pro-choicers favor elective abortion after 24 weeks,” I think that would definitely be a minority, in fact, a small one, but I could be wrong.
REality “Kel, if you are agreeing that someone is free to terminate in some circumstances then you are allowing choice. This would make you pro-choice. Some are more pro-choice than others.”
This is just playing with semantics. According to this logic, most of my friends and family would be considered pro-choice. And they all disagree completely w/Roe v Wade.
And more importanty, they all want abortion outlawed except to save the life of the mother. In other words, they want abortion laws to return to the way they wore in say 1970 pre Roe. They are all pro-life activists as well.
THIS IS NOT A PRO-CHOICE POSITION. But if it make u feel better to label people who are actively fighting to ban 99% of all abortions ”pro-choice” then I dunno what to tell u.
So accrding to this logic, if pro-choicers agree that abortion should be banned is some circumstances, then they are allowing life. THat would make them pro-life?
No it wouldn’t make them ‘pro-life’. If they allow for women to make a choice in any particular situation then they are ‘pro-choice’.
REality: “No it wouldn’t make them ‘pro-life’. If they allow for women to make a choice in any particular situation then they are ‘pro-choice’.
Interesting how ur logic does not go both ways.