Support for abortion drops to record low

posted at 11:21 am on May 23, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

A new Gallup poll shows that the pro-life position has once again reclaimed — narrowly — the majority among American adults.  Support for abortion dropped to its lowest level in the 18-year polling series, and the pro-life view gained among all partisan groups:

The 41% of Americans who now identify themselves as “pro-choice” is down from 47% last July and is one percentage point below the previous record low in Gallup trends, recorded in May 2009. Fifty percent now call themselves “pro-life,” one point shy of the record high, also from May 2009.

Gallup began asking Americans to define themselves as pro-choice or pro-life on abortion in 1995, and since then, identification with the labels has shifted from a wide lead for the pro-choice position in the mid-1990s, to a generally narrower lead for “pro-choice” — from 1998 through 2008 — to a close division between the two positions since 2009. However, in the last period, Gallup has found the pro-life position significantly ahead on two occasions, once in May 2009 and again today. It remains to be seen whether the pro-life spike found this month proves temporary, as it did in 2009, or is sustained for some period.

Actually, the trending on this has been in motion for several years, as the Gallup chart demonstrates:

This could reverse in the future, but the overall trend is falling support for abortion and rising support for pro-life positions.  The same trend can be seen in the partisan demos.  Republicans have backed the pro-life position all along, but support for abortion ran in the 30s until 2009, and has now declined to a new low of 22%.  The change has been less dramatic among Democrats, but support for abortion dropped to 58% in this poll, a decline of ten points in the last year and the lowest since 2003.  Independents now favor the pro-life position 47/41, a dramatic shift from last years’ 51/41 support for abortion, and the trend lines for independents roughly mirror the trends of the overall population.

We are seeing a societal shift in attitudes in abortion.  While a majority believe that abortion should be legal under certain circumstances, that number has been slowly drifting downward over the series, too, although the “legal in any circumstance” proportion has held steady in the mid-20s.  People seem more willing to identify as pro-life despite an overwhelming media and cultural bias in favor of abortion as a liberty issue.  With the US conducting over a million abortions every year and people gain a clearer understanding of the development of children in utero, the practice cannot help seem more and more barbaric.  We may still see some hiccups and occasional spikes in the wrong direction, but the long-term prospects for abortion support look almost as grim as abortion itself.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

I think Trayvon was probably a thug looking for no good

Logus on May 23, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Your basis for this is……

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

You’re right, inner city poverty is caused by abortion. Whatever, you don’t actually care about poverty in those communities, stop using that imagery like you give a sh*t.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Are you at all capable of acknowledging that your political opponents have good intentions, or are you just so mired in the discipline of treating your opponents like heartless, mechanical robots that all you can do is stick your fingers in your ears and scream “YOU DON’T REALLY CARE ABOUT PEOPLE! ONLY THOSE WHO AGREE WITH ME ACTUALLY CARE! YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID BASED ON MY BIGOTED VIEWS ABOUT YOU! LA LA LA LA LAAAA!”?

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Child please…

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:03 PM

You are a severe narcissist. You are not worth talking to, because you have no respect for anyone who disagrees with you. You’re proud of being an elitist douchebag. Have fun with that, pal.

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:06 PM

“YOU DON’T REALLY CARE ABOUT PEOPLE! ONLY THOSE WHO AGREE WITH ME ACTUALLY CARE! YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID BASED ON MY BIGOTED VIEWS ABOUT YOU! LA LA LA LA LAAAA!”?

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:05 PM

You are officially doing the most right now….

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:07 PM

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:00 PM

So, I take it you were there that night? There are many possible accounts of what happened, but please tell us exactly what did happen in all your wisdom so we can go ahead and lynch Zimmerman and save the taxpayers the money on this trial.

Esthier on May 23, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Esthier on May 23, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Don’t bother. That piece of s**t is too cowardly to respond to any substantive argument. As they’ve demonstrated, they’re not only willing to ignore every logical argument you make, but when they are forced to confront it, they’ll default merely to attacking you personally with the kind of internet bravado that I thought was limited to tweens on XBox Live.

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Do you really see a one-week fetus as “child” because an old bearded man in the clouds said so?

Archivarix on May 23, 2012 at 1:33 PM

No, because that’s what science says it is. Biologically speaking, the only real difference between you and a one-week fetus is the number of cells. You are both human, based solely on your DNA content. You are both alive based on the widely accepted scientific definition of life.

I can easliy destroy any pro-abortion argument while completely ignoring the concepts of religion, morality, even law.

Liberty, on the other hand, is completely denied to these pre-born human beings. If you consider yourself pro-abortion, you are by definition anti-liberty. You are certainly not pro-choice as you care nothing for the only relevant choice that child will make while still in the womb. To live. A choice you get to make every day.

Once pro-abortion activists start offing themselves in an attempt to convince me that life really does come down to a choice, I might take them seriously. Until then, they’re just another batch of hypocrites.

runawayyyy on May 23, 2012 at 2:09 PM

So, I take it you were there that night? There are many possible accounts of what happened, but please tell us exactly what did happen in all your wisdom so we can go ahead and lynch Zimmerman and save the taxpayers the money on this trial.

Esthier on May 23, 2012 at 2:07 PM

If you recall, the movement from the left was for there to BE a trial at all. Mission accomplished. We’ll see what happens.

As for your argument on responsibility I’ve answered it a million different ways. Lets review:

1. Men can not become pregnant, therefore it is not an “extra right.”
2. Men have significantly less biological, cultural and legal expectations to raise and support their own children, therefore they have less rights over whether a pregnancy comes to term.
3. Men can excercise choice in a variety of other ways.

You know, its ironic. Conservatives will argue till the cows come home that women have a “special role” in motherhood and reproducing the home, but when that same logic is used to argue that women have a right over their own pregnancies suddenly conservatives go faux liberal.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Your basis for this is……

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Same as your basis on everything you’ve ever argued on this site.

Subjective conjecture.

Actually, from the little bit that I’ve been following the case, apparently young Trayvon wasn’t the sweet, squeaky clean individual his family and supporters have been painting him to be. Furthermore, there had been recent burglaries/break-ins in that neighborhood and according to some/Zimmerman, Trayvon was looking around with a bit more interest then someone just walking through a neighborhood to get from A to B.

Logus on May 23, 2012 at 2:12 PM

I think Trayvon was probably a thug looking for no good

Logus on May 23, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Your basis for this is……

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

The drugs in his system?

His behavior that was described as being “like he’s on drugs”?

The fact that he attacked somebody who posed no threat to him, broke his nose and attempted to smash his head on the pavement?

The facts are still under examination by the proper authorities, but Logus’ position is one of those plausibly supported by the facts known to the public. His position is much, much more responsible than was the position of the entire leftist world that attempted to lynch George Zimmerman on the basis of a manufactured race incident.

philwynk on May 23, 2012 at 2:14 PM

If you recall, the movement from the left was for there to BE a trial at all. Mission accomplished.

I have yet to see reasonable evidence that this was in any way responsible behavior. The common response of legal commentators is that the state has no case against Zimmerman. The proper approach, when the state has no case, is not to hold a trial.

philwynk on May 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM

As they’ve demonstrated, they’re not only willing to ignore every logical argument you make, but when they are forced to confront it, they’ll default merely to attacking you personally with the kind of internet bravado that I thought was limited to tweens on XBox Live.

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:08 PM

How kind, we *do* prefer being referred to in the royal plural tense, we shall consider your passive aggressive response as we marinate this swiss chard and arugula for my elitist royal ball I’m hosting tonight. Though we *must* note that it is unlikely an Xbox tween could gather up this much shade, camp, snark and/or wit. You wound us to compare our elegant phraseology to the common ramblings of the online gaming-verse. Verily, we protest!

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:17 PM

I’d also like to point out that the pro-abortion folks I’ve met are all aware of the origins of planned parenthood. They just don’t care. They know perfectly well that it was started for the express purpose of using the “science” of eugenics to thin the black population in America. They know how wildly successful it’s been at accomplishing that very goal (40% of all abortions performed on 6% of the population….genocide anywhere else in the world).

libfreeordie is the perfect example of this. Oh, sure, she can’t ADMIT she thinks the country would be better off with fewer black people, but all you have to do is look at her total commitment to this genocide to know where her heart is.

Also, feel free to ignore her pleas regarding poverty in the black community. She is fully aware that policies she will never give up have led to this situation. She knows that virtually every major city with a ghetto has been run exclusively by leftists just like her for decades. She doesn’t want any solutions as these people are nothing more to her than a political club to gain political power.

A sick individual. There is no helping this level of evil.

runawayyyy on May 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Oh, crud. What hath I wrought?

I didn’t mean to derail this whole thread by bringing up the Martin shooting. My apologies.

JetBoy on May 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

The drugs in his system?

Marijuana stays in the body for 30 days. And also being stoned = he deserved to be killed? uh ok sure.

The common response of legal commentators is that the state has no case against Zimmerman.

Evidence please?

His behavior that was described as being “like he’s on drugs”?

By the person who eventually murdered him in cold blood, compelling evidence that.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM

How kind, we *do* prefer being referred to in the royal plural tense

“We” is a plural pronoun, not a tense. So much for elegant phraseology.

Trafalgar on May 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Oh, crud. What hath I wrought?

I didn’t mean to derail this whole thread by bringing up the Martin shooting. My apologies.

JetBoy on May 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Dammit, you liberal troll!!! :P

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:21 PM

libfreeordie is the perfect example of this. Oh, sure, she can’t ADMIT she thinks the country would be better off with fewer black people, but all you have to do is look at her total commitment to this genocide to know where her heart is.

I’m a dude, I’m black and I happen to know that my mother had an abortion in her younger years which allowed her to go to college and become an uber succesful woman in corporate America. Sorry to blow up your assumptions.

I’d also like to point out that the pro-abortion folks I’ve met are all aware of the origins of planned parenthood. They just don’t care.

Sort of like conservatives who know that this country was founded on the backs of African and African American slaves, but who just don’t care. Oh I forgot, we’re supposed to forget that but remember Margaret Sanger forever or something.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM

How kind, we *do* prefer being referred to in the royal plural tense…

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Jesus Christ, you’re a mental midget. I don’t know whether you’re male or female, so I was referring to you as “they” to avoid mistaking your gender. How do you somehow find fault with even the most basic courtesy which, as you’ve demonstrated, you don’t f**king deserve?

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:24 PM

I’m a dude…

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM

…but not a man.

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM

How do you somehow find fault with even the most basic courtesy which, as you’ve demonstrated, you don’t f**king deserve?

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Its true. When I think about your collective contribution to the blogosphere the first word that comes to mind is “courteous.”

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:26 PM

If you recall, the movement from the left was for there to BE a trial at all. Mission accomplished. We’ll see what happens.

That certainly wasn’t the only movement. If you recall, there was/is also a bounty on his head.

3. Men can excercise choice in a variety of other ways.

And women cannot?

You know, its ironic. Conservatives will argue till the cows come home that women have a “special role” in motherhood and reproducing the home, but when that same logic is used to argue that women have a right over their own pregnancies suddenly conservatives go faux liberal.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:12 PM

And you don’t see how that also bites your side? You’re the ones who want us all to be equal, except on this issue.

Also, I don’t give a sh!t about women’s special role as mothers or whatever. You keep throwing out caricatures of people because you don’t know us, but that’s not my problem.

Esthier on May 23, 2012 at 2:26 PM

I’m a dude…

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM

…but not a man.

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM

You can do better.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:26 PM

By the person who eventually murdered him in cold blood, compelling evidence that.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Give away your true feelings much?

NotCoach on May 23, 2012 at 2:27 PM

JetBoy on May 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Meh. Don’t worry bout it. People are finding tangential strings to attach it to the main topic. Regardless, I frankly find rabbit trails inevitable. All that matters is exactly what kind of rabbit trail are people going down and what’s the weather like as people start clouding the air? ;)

Logus on May 23, 2012 at 2:28 PM

How kind, we *do* prefer being referred to in the royal plural tense,

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Oh, come on. It’s obvious to everyone here that this account is used by more than one person, or that you have an allergic reaction to telling the truth. Either way, the plural is our best gender neutral right now, and since you’ve claimed to be both a man and a woman, it’s the best we’ve got.

Esthier on May 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

And you don’t see how that also bites your side? You’re the ones who want us all to be equal, except on this issue.

I “don’t want us all to be equal.” I don’t even know what that means. What I want is for all of us to be equal before the law. I want people’s work to be rewarded equally regardless of gender. I want political candidates to be judged on their ideology, ability to articulate that ideology and their vision for the American present and future, without regards to gender (or any other social category).

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

The one breakdown I would like to find is a breakdown by age. My guess is that “pro-choice” is strongest among women over 45, particularly those that were involved in the feminist movement of the 1960s and 1970s and as many of them pass away, they are being replaced by younger women who are more pro-life (e.g. Gloria Steinem being replaced by Lila Rose).

bw222 on May 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Oh, come on. It’s obvious to everyone here that this account is used by more than one person, or that you have an allergic reaction to telling the truth.

Now *thats* intriguing. Why do you think that?

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Its true. When I think about your collective contribution to the blogosphere the first word that comes to mind is “courteous.”

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:26 PM

When I think about your collective contribution to the blogosphere, the first word that comes to mind is “nothing”.

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:24 PM

MC, don’t let OrPo get under your skin. He’s just engaged in guerilla theatre and isn’t interested in debating, much less thinking. For example, you can’t really believe he’s into women’s sexual freedom from disinterested motives? He has to say things like that, especially since his “Dear Woman” video flopped.

DRPrice on May 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2012/confirmed/final.pdf

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Oh, my freakin’ goodness.

To conclude anything regarding left or right, or regarding one news source or another, based on this potentially interesting but woefully incomplete bit of “research,” is to mark oneself so hopelessly partisan as to be incapable of interpreting research.

Ask yourself: how can a “study” purport to demonstrate that a network is spreading “misinformation” without examining a single news report?

Ask yourself further: how can research asking 4 or 5 fact questions and then asking “what sources do you watch for news?” correlate the answers of the questions to the sources? Don’t we all have multiple sources for information? Isn’t the information a function of our interests and focus? Does previous education have a role? Do distractions like children in the room play a role? How many hundred other factors might be involved? Does correlation imply causation, ever?

You need to stop looking for reasons justifying your hatred, put your hatred aside, and start reading research with an eye toward objectively assessing just what it actually can tell you. Believe me, this bit of research can’t tell you anything useful about conservatives in general or about Fox News in general.

philwynk on May 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Give away your true feelings much?

NotCoach on May 23, 2012 at 2:27 PM

You certainly can’t accuse me of ever trying to conceal them on this, or any other topic.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:31 PM

By the person who eventually murdered him in cold blood, compelling evidence that.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Ah, so you’ve got everything together, weighed the evidence, and are judge and jury?

You should notify the media and the court that you’ve done their job for them.

lfod states Mr. Zimmerman is guilty. Case closed. Time to move on after we burn him at the stake.

Logus on May 23, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Sort of like conservatives who know that this country was founded on the backs of African and African American slaves, but who just don’t care. Oh I forgot, we’re supposed to forget that but remember Margaret Sanger forever or something.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Well, one was hundreds of years before any of us were born and have no control over whatsoever. The other is the continuation of the end goals of a racist woman.

Feel free to forget about it if you want. No one’s stopping you.

Esthier on May 23, 2012 at 2:33 PM

I “don’t want us all to be equal.” I don’t even know what that means. What I want is for all of us to be equal before the law. I want people’s work to be rewarded equally regardless of gender. I want political candidates to be judged on their ideology, ability to articulate that ideology and their vision for the American present and future, without regards to gender (or any other social category).

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

No one believes you. Your actions here show the exact opposite. You assume so much about us, because we disagree with you and somehow that makes us the embodiment of everything you don’t like. You are the exact opposite of this ideal.

And obviously not everyone is equal before the law. You keep saying that it’s slut shaming to expect women to be careful before having sex, but that it’s somehow OK for men to be treated this way.

Esthier on May 23, 2012 at 2:35 PM

What I want is for all of us to be equal before the law.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Except for pre-born children of course.

Trafalgar on May 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM

MC, don’t let OrPo get under your skin. He’s just engaged in guerilla theatre and isn’t interested in debating, much less thinking. For example, you can’t really believe he’s into women’s sexual freedom from disinterested motives? He has to say things like that, especially since his “Dear Woman” video flopped.

DRPrice on May 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

I just despise those who willfully engage in debate and then avoid actual debating if it doesn’t fit their narrative. They demean the arguments of their side through such behavior, and I take opposing viewpoints extremely seriously. He/she/its’ disregard for actually defending their point of view cheapens the dialogue, and demonstrates a cowardly realization of the fact that they can’t justify why they feel the way they do. Sometimes I can’t justify why I feel the way I do, but I can admit it, because I’m not ashamed of those beliefs. This cowardly dance on their part belies doubt.

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Either way, the plural is our best gender neutral right now, and since you’ve claimed to be both a man and a woman, it’s the best we’ve got.

Esthier on May 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

I’ve never claimed to be a woman, I was very coy about gender during the first 6 months or so here, but I’ve gradually revealed more info about myself. Perhaps you believed I was a woman because I made reference to a boyfriend, which I do have (put two and two together on that one). But those are your assumptions and not my problem. Perhaps you think I am multiple people because I have different tones at different times. And I confess its true, I particularly enjoy messing with dear MadCon. His buttons are the size of pre-school Lego blocks and easy peazy to push. Particularly since during my *long* lurker period I saw him be incredibly nasty to lots of people lots of the time. It amuses me to see him flustered.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Sort of like conservatives who know that this country was founded on the backs of African and African American slaves, but who just don’t care. Oh I forgot, we’re supposed to forget that but remember Margaret Sanger forever or something.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Let’s see… slavery was abolished about 150 years ago. Legalized abortion continues, specifically the motives, organization and beliefs of a woman who supported it.

Logus on May 23, 2012 at 2:37 PM

Now *thats* intriguing. Why do you think that?

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

No need for there to be a mystery. I explained myself just a little further down.

But I’ll restate it.

You’ve claimed to be a man and a woman here, and when called on it, you acted as though it was weird that anyone would care what you are.

Esthier on May 23, 2012 at 2:38 PM

You assume so much about us, because we disagree with you and somehow that makes us the embodiment of everything you don’t like.

I don’t assume anything. I merely use your words and expose the implication of the logic underlying those claims. Its a tactic everyone here uses. Hence the conservative argument that those who support government anti-poverty programs want to “enslave” the populace. Or have you not heard those kinds of claims?

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Note how the leftist never actually denies being the filthy racist she most certainly is. She insists she’s both male and black, most certainly because she believes black people are incapable of being racist (itself a racist ideal, but you can bet she holds onto it for dear life….and yes, I’ve heard leftists of both the white and black races make this claim).

Note also how she refuses to answer for the genocide her politics have enabled. If she truly is black (I know no man who thinks like her but hey, she insists) she’s admitting to being complicit in the genocide of her own people. Note how that just rolls off her back. She believes there should be fewer of HER OWN PEOPLE! Sick.

Further, note how she refuses to acknowledge the facts presented about the living conditions of her people in the inner cities controlled by her fellow leftists for decades. Do any of us think she’s unaware of these facts? Of course not, but again, she can’t ADMIT it.

Like I said, this level of evil can not be helped. It can be defeated though, which scares her out of her skin (whatever the color).

runawayyyy on May 23, 2012 at 2:44 PM

You know, its ironic. Conservatives will argue till the cows come home that women have a “special role” in motherhood and reproducing the home, but when that same logic is used to argue that women have a right over their own pregnancies suddenly conservatives go faux liberal.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:12 PM

.
Conservatives have standards of morality as pertains to (drum roll please) . . . . . . SEX.

listens2glenn on May 23, 2012 at 2:45 PM

It appears to me that the 2009 poll was an outlier. The trend is solid.

Harpoon on May 23, 2012 at 2:46 PM

And I confess its true, I particularly enjoy messing with dear MadCon. His buttons are the size of pre-school Lego blocks and easy peazy to push. Particularly since during my *long* lurker period I saw him be incredibly nasty to lots of people lots of the time. It amuses me to see him flustered.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Wait…so you take my expressed aggression to mean I am actually angered or unsettled? And you admit that you’re solely commenting in hopes of drawing ire? Awesome. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a person self-identify more comprehensively as a troll in nearly 20 years on the internet.

And I love how you seem to be fixated on how I have been “particularly nasty to lots of people”, especially when citing it to excuse your own particularly nasty conduct. While I will freely admit that I figuratively tear the flesh from opponent’s bones with my teeth, roll it around to savor the taste of their blood, and spit it back into a nearby wine bucket…my ferocity is used to amplify my points, which I make honestly. I do not engage in mass straw man arguments, I do not attempt to deflect away from the core of issues, and I certainly do not portray my opponents as if they are all heartless, calculating machines with zero good intentions behind their views.

You, on the other hand, regularly put arguments into people’s mouths that they never made, continuously avoid central concepts of issues in order to dodge arguments that you cannot counter, and you constantly dismiss the notion that your opponents actually care about all segments of society. You epitomize the polarizing attitude that is destroying political discussion in America…and you’re proud of doing so. “Troll” is too good of a label for you. You’re a toxic parasite.

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:47 PM

If there were more polls on pro-life vs pro-abortion, maybe AP would be less all-gay-all-day. Maybe Sarah Palin could say something that AP would find as traffic bait about this poll.

Speaking of leftists removing themselves from the gene pool, has the Rowe effect shifted young voters to be more pro-life (in addition to how Obama aborted economic growth)?

WhatNot on May 23, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Except for pre-born children of course.

Trafalgar on May 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Well… the law doesn’t see the unborn as persons and thus human beings (in most cases), thus the loop-hole liberals turn to. Wrap themselves in the equality of the law when it works to their favor. It’s how abortion remains legal… because the unborn are not granted the legal rights/definition of personhood/humanity, thus they can be legally killed. Legal relativism. Fits right in with liberal/moral relativism.

Just like how LibFree effectively said/condoned/accepted his mother’s abortion because she was then able to get a degree and a good job.

Yeah… money and how the living get to live life is so much more important and valuable than the unborn. LibFree’s unborn sibling was holding his mother back.

Hey, LibFree… my grandfather effectively forced my grandmother to have an abortion too. His plans were more important and his excuse was that they didn’t have enough money… nevermind that his family would have helped him. I loved my grandfather, but I do not respect him for that, nor do I respect my grandmother for giving in to him and going through with it… and her having been a nurse. He found someone willing to perform it… this was back in the 30′s.

A job, money, station in life, does not hold a candle to the value of any human life.

I’d rather live in abject poverty then kill my unborn child so that I could make a buck and live pretty.

“It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish.” Mother Teresa

Logus on May 23, 2012 at 2:48 PM

I don’t assume anything. I merely…expose the implication…

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:40 PM

You also don’t lie about anything. You merely express ideas that you may know not be true.

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Libfreeordie mad because most people don’t believe in murdering unborn children?

Gatekeeper on May 23, 2012 at 2:50 PM

I get it… the fetus can’t support itself; so killing it is ok and not murder.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2012/03/after_birth_abortion_the_pro_choice_case_for_infanticide_.html

Oh, and according to the Journal of medical Ethics article; the 6 month old child can’t support itself; so killing IT is also ok and not murder. Just “post-birth abortion”.

Same argument, same conclusion… killing small children because they might inconvenience your life should be ok, right?\

of not.. why not? What magically happens to make the fetus/baby less of an inconvenience simply because it was born? Does something magical and mystical happen when it’s delivered? Are they less human if it’s a C-section?

Or can we advocate for the murder of small children that might be inconvenient now? We’ve already got some strong advocates for killing children after they’re born.. is there a logical reason “post-birth abortion” should be different from pre-birth abortion?

gekkobear on May 23, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Sort of like conservatives who know that this country was founded on the backs of African and African American slaves, but who just don’t care. Oh I forgot, we’re supposed to forget that but remember Margaret Sanger forever or something.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM

.
The USA was not “founded on the backs of slaves”.

Once again you’re hiding behind the false premise that “conservatives are racists”, in your attempts at validating your position on something completely unrelated.

listens2glenn on May 23, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Dammit, you liberal troll!!! :P

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 2:21 PM

ಠ_ಠ

Meh. Don’t worry bout it. People are finding tangential strings to attach it to the main topic. Regardless, I frankly find rabbit trails inevitable. All that matters is exactly what kind of rabbit trail are people going down and what’s the weather like as people start clouding the air? ;)

Logus on May 23, 2012 at 2:28 PM

I don’t know how the Zimmerman case can be related to an abortion poll…but I guess I’ve seen stranger associations between two separate issues. I suppose there’s only 6 degrees of separation between any two stories.

JetBoy on May 23, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Sort of like conservatives who know that this country was founded on the backs of African and African American slaves, but who just don’t care. Oh I forgot, we’re supposed to forget that but remember Margaret Sanger forever or something.

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Not for nothing, but where did this one come from? “libfree” seems like a particularly entertaining liberal at least :P

JetBoy on May 23, 2012 at 2:56 PM

How kind, we *do* prefer being referred to in the royal plural tense, we shall consider your passive aggressive response as we marinate this swiss chard and arugula for my elitist royal ball I’m hosting tonight. Though we *must* note that it is unlikely an Xbox tween could gather up this much shade, camp, snark and/or wit. You wound us to compare our elegant phraseology to the common ramblings of the online gaming-verse. Verily, we protest!

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:17 PM

.
Only politicians and high-profile entertainment industry types (includes pro sports figures) enjoy that standard of living.

You don’t measure-up any more (or less) than any of the rest of us here do.

listens2glenn on May 23, 2012 at 2:57 PM

How kind, we *do* prefer being referred to in the royal plural tense, we shall consider your passive aggressive response as we marinate this swiss chard and arugula for my elitist royal ball I’m hosting tonight. Though we *must* note that it is unlikely an Xbox tween could gather up this much shade, camp, snark and/or wit. You wound us to compare our elegant phraseology to the common ramblings of the online gaming-verse. Verily, we protest!

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:17 PM

I guess Obama will be there. He likes arugula after all.

Logus on May 23, 2012 at 3:06 PM

patch on May 23, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Some people who don’t want kids of their own, or who are undecided if they want their own, are not pro-abortion.

(This is a position that is especially confusing to left wing childfree- by- choice types. They cannot seem to fathom that someone can be childfree yet also be pro-life.)

Jet, I think I agree with your overall point, but I’d rephrase it. I’d argue that allowing a rape victim to have an abortion rather than putting the pressure of law on her to carry her attacker’s child is the lesser of two evils, but I don’t think her actually having the abortion is itself the lesser evil.
Some women do still raise children born of rape, and I am very much in awe of them.
Esthier on May 23, 2012 at 12:52 PM

I have seen so many interviews over the years by women who got pregnant by rape, carried the baby to term, and even raised (and loved) the child.

These women have survived just fine.

(I think giving such a baby up for adoption once it’s born is acceptable.)

I don’t know why so many people act as though women are fragile little weaklings who will fall apart if asked to consider carrying a baby conceived by rape to term.

Other women have done it and have made it.

I’ve seen interviews with people who are now adults who were products of rape, and they all said they were grateful their moms did not abort them.

I think one such person is pastor James Robison (he has his own daily television show). If I remember right, his mother was raped at age 41 or 42 and became pregnant with him.

I’ve seen other people interviewed, ones who were conceived by rape, and they said they’re glad their moms did not abort.

TigerPaw on May 23, 2012 at 3:08 PM

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM

I never assumed you were a woman. You’ve only ever told me you were male. Others have sworn you said you were female, and when I called you on it, your response was to act as though we were invading your privacy like a peeping Tom.

Man, woman, gay, straight, I don’t care. I simply prefer honesty.

Esthier on May 23, 2012 at 3:11 PM

The USA was not “founded on the backs of slaves”.

Once again you’re hiding behind the false premise that “conservatives are racists”, in your attempts at validating your position on something completely unrelated.

listens2glenn on May 23, 2012 at 2:52 PM

I think very few white American people could afford to own slaves.

I’ve read articles about it that said only the wealthy could afford slaves, so not many southerners owned any, but so many Hollywood movies or classroom text books make it sound as though every single white southerner owned fifty slaves each, as though it was very prevalent, but it was not.

TigerPaw on May 23, 2012 at 3:13 PM

I don’t assume anything. I merely use your words and expose the implication of the logic underlying those claims. Its a tactic everyone here uses. Hence the conservative argument that those who support government anti-poverty programs want to “enslave” the populace. Or have you not heard those kinds of claims?

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:40 PM

I have, including your objection to that specific argument.

And it’s call projection, not implication.

Esthier on May 23, 2012 at 3:13 PM

TigerPaw on May 23, 2012 at 3:13 PM

I don’t recall the percentages, but in my history classes I seem to recall hearing similarly. Most whites didn’t own slaves. Most slave owners only owned one or a handful. Very few slave owners owned dozens to hundreds. Slaves were not cheap property.

Oh, and of course there’s also the few blacks that owned slaves…

Shhh…

Logus on May 23, 2012 at 3:22 PM

I think very few white American people could afford to own slaves.

I’ve read articles about it that said only the wealthy could afford slaves, so not many southerners owned any, but so many Hollywood movies or classroom text books make it sound as though every single white southerner owned fifty slaves each, as though it was very prevalent, but it was not.

TigerPaw on May 23, 2012 at 3:13 PM

Naw, see…every white male owned slaves, just like every white male is issued a magical money tree at birth. That’s the “white male privilege” we always hear about.

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Sure sounds like brain-free has really stepped in it today and tracking his mess all over.

If you can control your ‘nads you can control that aspect of one’s life. It’s called personal responsibility (and taking responsibility for any child resulting rather than killing it for convenience). Blaming The Man because you can’t stop screwing because “you’re the victim” or great-great-granddaddy was isn’t marketing as it once did.

BTW. Much of the slave trade in Africa proper was organized and operated by blacks particularly black Aaaaaay-rabs such as Zero’s ancestors. Someone should ask Zero about it.

viking01 on May 23, 2012 at 3:34 PM

listens2glenn on May 23, 2012 at 2:52 PM

.
I think very few white American people could afford to own slaves.

I’ve read articles about it that said only the wealthy could afford slaves, so not many southerners owned any, but so many Hollywood movies or classroom text books make it sound as though every single white southerner owned fifty slaves each, as though it was very prevalent, but it was not.

TigerPaw on May 23, 2012 at 3:13 PM

.
You are of course, quite correct.

Won’t make any difference to them, though.

listens2glenn on May 23, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Wow, I can’t believe she shut up….must be looking for an example of an inner city sh!thole that hasn’t been run into the ground by her fellow leftists over the last several decades….

My premise was simple. No one, of any race, who advocates for abortion like any true believing leftist does these days can possibly claim to be anything but a screaming racist against the black population of this country.

The entire abortion industry in this country was founded on that very principle. And the leftists know it. And even if they don’t, their ignorance is hardly an excuse to go around killing children, 40% of whom are black.

That’s why they look so ridiculous trying to defend such madness. Evil, plain and simple.

runawayyyy on May 23, 2012 at 3:42 PM

[J]ust like every white male is issued a magical money tree at birth.

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Dude, STFU. There are some things you don’t admit too, because I ain’t sharing my money tree with anyone.

NotCoach on May 23, 2012 at 3:45 PM

As the ability to avoid conception increases, fewer people support the “right” to stab that baby in the head with a fork? You don’t say.

Sarcasm aside, some of this shift is also due to the radicalism of the pro-”choice” movement. For years, they had been able to paint pro-lifers as the radical ones, but when they demand government funding for abortion, private funding for abortion (via ObamaCare), fight any semblance of accountability for abortion mills, and cry that third-trimester abortions are hard to obtain, they only alienate normal Americans who aren’t necessarily pro-life, but are squeamish about abortion and understand that it is wrong.

Roxeanne de Luca on May 23, 2012 at 3:50 PM

I think Trayvon was probably a thug looking for no good

Logus on May 23, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Your basis for this is……

libfreeordie on May 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

It could be that honky honky Hispanic that Saint Trayvon was trying to kill while on suspension out shopping for Skittles for Zim having dat mo-fo’ing Neighborhood Watch intrude on his turf. Just ask Saint Trayvon’s parent’s marketing agency and the Justice Brothers for details. I’m sure they can dream up something brain-free would swallow.

viking01 on May 23, 2012 at 3:52 PM

Who would have thought that killing babies would poll poorly?

JavelinaBomb on May 23, 2012 at 4:18 PM

The Roe v. Wade Supreme Court Case was decided in 1973.

So anybody who is age 39 or younger is fortunate to have been born.

And as these people learn about the abortion issue they will realize it is their generation that is missing so many aborted classmates, friends-who-might-have-been, brothers, sisters, cousins etc.

Anybody who was born in 1973 or later will find it much easier to relate to the unborn child’s perspective.

As each year goes by, more and more people will have a very personal reason to be pro-life.

wren on May 23, 2012 at 5:30 PM

If you want a tool to show the impact of abortion on younger generations, here is a video clip of the spoof ad in the movie “Swing Vote.”

Abortion commercial scene from the movie “Swing Vote”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQ_U0QJ3dx0

The visual impact of the disappearing children in the ad is not easily forgotten.

You may also want to watch the whole “Swing Vote” movie (which is very good!) with pro-choice friends/relatives as a less obvious way of exposing them to the abortion commercial scene.

wren on May 23, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Hey.. who has seen the new “life” commercial put out by the Catholic Church! Freaking awesome!

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=D9vQt6IXXaM&hd

JellyToast on May 23, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Hey.. who has seen the new “life” commercial put out by the Catholic Church! Freaking awesome!

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=D9vQt6IXXaM&hd

JellyToast on May 23, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Awesome ad, Jelly Toast!

Combine it with the awesome movie, For Greater Glory, which I saw at an advance screening last night, and every Catholic voter in America will know why they need to fight hard during this election season.

wren on May 23, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Here is a link to the trailer for the movie “For Greater Glory”:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1566501/

“For Greater Glory” opens in theaters on June 1. Save a spot for it on your calendar now!

wren on May 23, 2012 at 6:36 PM

JellyToast thanks for sharing the commerical it was very good, more people need to see it.

Beastdogs on May 23, 2012 at 7:04 PM

In as much as Democrats are still reproducing should we keep abortion legal?

Some might consider this to be a public service and the best way to secure liberty to ourselves and to our posterity?

The first law of politics: When your opponent is self destructing, don’t interupt!

Naw, I love their kids more than they love their own kids.

The Rock on May 23, 2012 at 7:07 PM

This is good news!!..Pro Life is winning!!!..That is really good news!..:)

Dire Straits on May 23, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Good news. Pro-life educational efforts through the years are making a difference.

WannabeAnglican on May 23, 2012 at 11:37 AM

+ 100..Hear!..Hear!..:)

Dire Straits on May 23, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Speak the truth and people get it.

wi farmgirl on May 23, 2012 at 9:17 PM

Hey.. who has seen the new “life” commercial put out by the Catholic Church! Freaking awesome!

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=D9vQt6IXXaM&hd

JellyToast on May 23, 2012 at 6:10 PM

That was awesome.

wi farmgirl on May 23, 2012 at 9:23 PM

The most accurate poll is when you put it to a referendum. In the voting booth, the folks will vote their true beliefs on non-partisan issues

Likewise, put abortion to a referendum and you’ll see how people will really feel about it. That hasn’t happened yet because people feel like it is a moot issue due to RvW etc, but if it were on the ballot, the pro-lifers would overwhelm the pro-abortionists. I for one would like to see just one State do it anyway and let the momentum build from there.

AH_C on May 23, 2012 at 9:24 PM

I for one would like to see just one State do it anyway and let the momentum build from there.

AH_C on May 23, 2012 at 9:24 PM

.
I’ll second that motion.

Unfortunately, in this case that doesn’t mean the motion is carried.
.
.
.
Yet . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

listens2glenn on May 23, 2012 at 10:17 PM

I find it interesting that liberals will fall all over themselves to defend their so called right to murder unborn children, yet in the same breath will say that law abiding American citizens have no right to defend themselves or family members from criminal scumbags.

Beastdogs on May 23, 2012 at 10:31 PM

Hey.. who has seen the new “life” commercial put out by the Catholic Church! Freaking awesome!

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=D9vQt6IXXaM&hd

JellyToast on May 23, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Agree with you and wi farmgirl, that was awesome. Totally and obviously anti-Obama without even mentioning his name. Sweet! What has the pro-death-pro-Obama crowd got to match it?

swinia sutki on May 24, 2012 at 7:22 AM

There are millions of mothers out there who wish they hadn’t given in to pressure from their babies’ fathers (or their parents, or other people) and killed their sons and daughters by abortion. Or who realize that it was wrong to make their babies pay for their mistakes. There are millions of mothers who have suffered injury at the hands of abortionists.

Millions of those mothers are speaking out and convincing other people that abortion is fatal to babies and often harmful (and sometimes fatal) to mothers.

The “rape and incest exception” is supported by some people who consider themselves pro-life. But isn’t the unborn child of a rapist or incestuous parent as innocent, and as deserving of care, as every other unborn child?

Ethel Waters was conceived when her mother was raped at knifepoint. Ethel had problems in her life, as do we all, but she was a fine singer and actress, and much loved by many people. We never know what the future holds for anyone, but every child deserves a chance.

Besides, a 2000 survey by Dr. David Reardon found that out of 192 women who had become pregnant through rape or incest, more than 90 percent of those who had aborted their babies said that they would discourage other mothers from doing so. Ninety-four percent (94%) of the rape victims and 100% of the incest victims told Reardon that abortion was NOT a good option for women in their situations.
Raping a woman is a terrible injustice, but so is sentencing her baby to death. Doing violence to the baby will not undo the violence done to mother.

The baby is not the mother’s attacker, but is, in fact, a second victim, who should not be executed for the father’s crime. Rapists are spared the death penalty, so why should their babies be executed?

What would your reaction be if your mother told you that you had been conceived through rape (or incest)? Would you say, “I should have been killed–my life isn’t worth living”?

Or would you say, “Thanks, Mom, for giving me a chance–thanks for letting me live”?

KyMouse on May 24, 2012 at 10:13 AM

make abortion illegal again and you will have so many sob stories flooding the media, that the public support will change soon after.

nathor on May 24, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Color me skeptical. Every few years the pro- and anti-abortion sides come out with a shiny new poll that shows Just How Much Our Side Is Winning!(tm) And guess how much the legal status of abortion changes? Little to none.

When the anti-abortion movement can back up their polls with some real change, or better yet a serious movement to repeal Roe, then I’ll get excited.

MelonCollie on May 24, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Elsewhere in socialist dispotia;

Doctors in Beed, India are reportedly feeding aborted girls to dogs to hide evidence they are doing sex-selection abortions.

Food for Thought: Would pro-abortion Obama eat dog raised on aborted Indian girls?

war on women

Terp Mole on May 24, 2012 at 2:42 PM

JetBoy on May 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Not your fault ol boy !!

Libturd trolls like brainfree are like sharks sniffing for that drop of proverbial “off-topic” blood to consume and eventually take the whole thread down the toilet with their stupidity and grade school-like tantrums !

cableguy615 on May 24, 2012 at 9:09 PM

I would venture to say that the answer depends mightily on what one defines as “child”. I tend to have my cutoff at the heartbeat detection. Do you really see a one-week fetus as “child” because an old bearded man in the clouds said so?

Archivarix on May 23, 2012 at 1:33 PM

I heard my baby’s heartbeat at 33 days after conception.

However, I do see a one-week fetus as a child because of the separate DNA.

cptacek on May 25, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3