Not linked. Those two things don’t belong in the same paragraph.

bmmg39 on January 29, 2013 at 12:43 PM

You don’t belong in this discussion.

They’re all linked, of course.
To be Christian is to be pro-life.
To be Christian is to oppose homosexual marriage.

itsnotaboutme on January 29, 2013 at 6:36 AM

Not linked. Those two things don’t belong in the same paragraph.

Let me guess, you’re a lib-tard-tarian?

Just keep the govt out of it. Americans don’t want the govt to be in charge of pregnancy and it is never happening.

SO many people waste so much time on something that is never going to happen.

itsnotaboutme on January 29, 2013 at 6:36 AM

.
You should enlighten the Anti-Catholic Catholics of this mantra.

and, Good Luck with that.

We were going over some broad polling data in a Bible study the other day concerning a shift from people calling themselves Christian to people calling themselves of no religion or agnostic. The presentation in the news was that Christianity was faltering in the public/with people, but deeper introspection saw that the way the polling was divided up, it’s more likely that most of the people who now call themselves of no religion or agnostic were nominal or name only Christians previously… and frankly, if you’re nominal or a CINO, the only person you’re fooling is yourself. The polling of strong Christians has probably shrunk, but I suspect has largely stayed about the same over the decades. Bell curves and all that.

So, just as with this abortion poll, if indeed this trend holds true, then it’s nothing more than a sign that the comments of Akin and Mourdock shook loose the individuals who thought they were pro-life but really weren’t.

Logus on January 29, 2013 at 1:07 AM

Yes, indeed.

The same is true of public approval for homosexual marriage.

They’re all linked, of course.
To be Christian is to be pro-life.
To be Christian is to oppose homosexual marriage.

How can a couple of misstatements by 2nd- or third-tier pro-life politicians can sway millions toward keeping murder legal?

itsnotaboutme on January 28, 2013 at 10:48 PM

It will not… Pro-life people are very principled and they will not become abortionist because of two idiotic statements from Akin/Murdoch… Allahpunidt is making stupid analysis and he does very often…

mnjg on January 28, 2013 at 11:09 PM

You give too much credit to the general public.

Those involved with saving kids’ lives are indeed principled, but most folks who put The Simpsons on pause to answer the phone survey are as fickle as the wind.

So, just as with this abortion poll, if indeed this trend holds true, then it’s nothing more than a sign that the comments of Akin and Mourdock shook loose the individuals who thought they were pro-life but really weren’t.

If you’re pro-life, you don’t come by it easily nor do you leave it easily in one fell swoop…

Logus on January 29, 2013 at 1:07 AM

Totally agree. Punishing unborn children for the words of politicians flies in the face of all that the pro-life movement stands for. Either those people weren’t really pro-life before, or this poll is off.

But about the poll…things have gotten a whole lot uglier since the election. The pure hatred people are expressing for Christians, for traditional values, and for anything remotely associated with those things (like the Republican Party or even America as she was pre-2008) is reaching bizarre levels (rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth, we-must-have-blood, no-shred-of-logic-behind-the-ferocity-of-the-outlash levels–not unlike the nonsensical hatred that is regularly expressed toward Israel, come to think of it). I have a feeling common decency and wisdom would poll badly, too.

I’m thinking we’re getting a taste of a truth that our culture has largely been protected from until now: that “the world” will hate Christians and their values, just like the world hated Jesus in His time.

So, just as with this abortion poll, if indeed this trend holds true, then it’s nothing more than a sign that the comments of Akin and Mourdock shook loose the individuals who thought they were pro-life but really weren’t.

If you’re pro-life, you don’t come by it easily nor do you leave it easily in one fell swoop… but the opposite does often happen. People wake up and become pro-life after having been pro-choice.

How can a couple of misstatements by 2nd- or third-tier pro-life politicians can sway millions toward keeping murder legal?

itsnotaboutme on January 28, 2013 at 10:48 PM

It will not… Pro-life people are very principled and they will not become abortionist because of two idiotic statements from Akin/Murdoch… Allahpunidt is making stupid analysis and he does very often…

Akin/Mourdock fiascos

How can a couple of misstatements by 2nd- or third-tier pro-life politicians can sway millions toward keeping murder legal?

Eleven months later, as of a week after the presidential election, that six-point gap had more than doubled

Given the recent experience with polls during the last campaign, it may be wise to view such wild swings using a bit of a skeptic eye.

Game over social cons humanity.

WisCon on January 28, 2013 at 9:19 PM

Fixed.

Wileygrl3 on January 28, 2013 at 7:38 PM

Akin is not a strawman. He had the full-throated support of the pro-life community. But he should not have had that support, because his “magical uterus” theory set the prolife cause back. He was the avatar for the movement and he proved himself a buffoon. People do not want to identify with a movement whose avatar is a buffoon. It matters a great deal who a movement chooses as its public face. Both of Akin’s competitors were staunchly pro-life and would not have embarrassed the movement. But the pro-life crowd chose the purist, and that was a bad choice.

Gotta admit your mistakes if you hope to change. Find an appealing candidate who espouses your views. Don’t demand a purist.

the majority is pro choice. some might agree with the prolife principle, but wont stomach imposing it on anyone.

nathor on January 28, 2013 at 5:00 PM

No, the majority is somewhere in between, and the only choices in the poll are pro-choice and pro-life. Example: I support parental notification laws, mandatory ultrasounds, a ban on telling women it’s just a clump of cells, and a ban on all abortions beyond 13 weeks. I support legal abortion for adult women in the first 13 weeks, given the above limitations.

Am I pro-life or pro-choice? I could describe myself as either, given the way the question is presented. It’s therefore a matter of which label I choose to adopt/identify with, not a change in the underlying beliefs.

and yet, what’s to stop us from doing the same thing?

I guaran-dang-tee ya, there’s a huge market for better pop culture, better news, yes, better polls, for people willing and able to do it.

Don’t act surprised as America rushes headlong into fiscal insolvency and gets taken over by an invading force.

Grace is over.

tom daschle concerned on January 28, 2013 at 5:55 PM

My money’s on for that to happen in 5-10 years.

God doesn’t bless tyrannies. He can and has revoked his grace on America; all that’s left now is the takeover by Islamofacists.

avgjo on January 28, 2013 at 7:16 PM

We’re being bombarded with it. It’s going to be Traditional values = bad..military = bad..guns= bad..productivity= bad..religion= bad.. McDonalds= bad…Pot= gooood etc, for every single leftwing retard concept since Woodstock.
Having Commandant Obama reelected changed the whole thing. Matter of fact, thats what Van Jones said..”We’re not going change a bit here and there..we’re gonna change the whooole thing.”

How can you honestly say this? To “calm down”? I see every indication of the pro-choice pro-abortion crowd as kicking into high gear. When you have an administration intent on making tax payers help fund abortions (read the HHS Mandate) , when you have TV shows and movies making random sex okay, when you now have schools handing out condoms..that should make the pro-life movement feel okay enough to “calm down”? No..we sat on the sidelines for too long. You can pull out people like Aiken and Mourock..both strawmen in this debate. I find it interesting that there is no debate about the emotional damage done to women, and men, involved in abortion. To tell pro-life people to “calm down” is an insult. Life vs. death is never something to calm down about.

portlandon on January 28, 2013 at 4:42 PM

There is still hope. It is just going to take people voting with their conscience, especially Catholics. Hispanic Catholics most especially.

And that, in a nutshell, is why the pro-life movement is dying: you refuse to admit people into your team who are “pro-life with exceptions” anymore. And instead you defend and praise the Akins and Mourdocks, criticizing them only for their political foolishness as opposed to the actual content of their opinions.

Esoteric on January 28, 2013 at 5:32 PM

You have a point about the overall effect Akin and Mourdock had and are still having on the “pro-life” brand. Virginia’s attempt to force women to have ultrasounds before the pregnancy, including invasive ultrasounds, was also an overreach. I also agree that the GOP needs to be more accomodating to those who are “pro-life with exceptions,” which is always a more accurate characterization of the majority of Americans. Polls show that while the number of people wanting to declare abortion outright illegal has shrunk, the number wanting restrictions that were unheard of just 10 years ago is growing. In the 80s and 90s, parental consent was still being debated, yet most people, including women, want parental consent and notification. Even abortion in rape and incest is not permitted past the second trimester in most states. In most cases, however, the pregnancy is discovered and the abortion is completed by then.

What the pro-life crowd needs to do is calm down. The strides that have been made in the pro-life movement has been quite striking if you think about it. In the 70′s there was a movement to allow abortion on demand up to and including the third trimester. Popular media presented abortion as a choice with no consequences (no life here, just a blob of tissue like your appendix) – google the show “Maude” to see what I am talking about. Today, most people who answer to this zero-sum poll as pro-choice still favor restrictions that the true pro-choice crowd howl at. Also – give the pro-choice club their chance – they will overreach. We saw it with the Slate article the other day and I think we will see it again and again. The GOP needs to move on and away from Akin and Mourdock, but it needs to make clear that it will not acquiesce to the Planned Parenthood or NARAL crowd (like the Democrats have).

Agreed. This is more mind-molestation courtesy of the freaks on the left.

They did a study some years ago that found out poll results affect people’s opinions over time (it’s just another version of the ‘i’ll do it because everyone else is’ stupidity). that idea is behind most of these polls.

Hell, Obama has come out for outright infanticide and wasn’t tarnished by it one bit. Next up will be sex with children or killing them after they are born. At the rate we’re going that shouldn’t take long.

And into the prestigious Hall of Human Atrocities.

Eat your babies. See if I care.

Grace is over.

As far as the voters who were disgusted at these comments, what percentage to you think even know about Obama’s opposition to the Born Alive Infant Protection act? If they don’t know, then media bias is far greater problem for conservatives than the Akins of the world. If they do know and don’t care or wouldn’t care if they did know, then this society is well beyond saving.

I think some know. I do think they do not care, or think it is not their business. If there is any indication based on their parent’s actions, these children would mostly be a drain on society. Just like the parents.

Esoteric on January 28, 2013 at 5:32 PM

I’m pro-life and have no problem with abortion in cases of rape, incest, or life of the mother. There, now you can say you’ve seent that sentiment expressed in the comments at HA.

Also, I find your claim outrageous that no one had a problem with the Akin/Mourdock sentiments, just that they were verbalized. I haven’t gone back through the multiple threads but I recall plenty of disagreement from even the staunchest socons.

As far as the voters who were disgusted at these comments, what percentage to you think even know about Obama’s opposition to the Born Alive Infant Protection act? If they don’t know, then media bias is far greater problem for conservatives than the Akins of the world. If they do know and don’t care or wouldn’t care if they did know, then this society is well beyond saving.

Seriously, I do believe most people are pro-choice to some degree. Trollish behavior among some people in the populist/conservative electorate have turned many people off. Plus it’s been beaten into their heads for how many years?

You can scoff at this poll and say: “no way, this isn’t accurate” at your own risk.