41% of Americans Pro-Choice........50% Pro-Life
 

Gallup released a poll today showing Pro-Choice (Pro-Abortion) advocacy is down to a record low 41% of Americans

Meanwhile, 50% of Americans refer to themselves as Pro-Life!!

The decline in Pro-Abortions is seen across all 3 political groups.

I knew in my heart that this had to be the case. Life over Death; it's elementary.

"Pro-Choice" Americans at Record-Low 41%

I knew in my heart that this had to be the case. Life over Death; it's elementary.

If we all thought that simply, life would be simple as well, but since so many of us can think in a more complex way life is sometimes complicated. Like Hitler believed in one race, very simple. Like all dictators ITS MY WAY OR DIE, very simple.

Thank God and the majority democratic vote for Roe Vs Wade.

It's telling that, later on in the article, 52% still say abortion should be legal under certain terms.

It's like I've said for a long time. Nobody *likes* abortion - but sometimes there are reasons for it.

Yes, and I pray for the women that live under the constant fear that their rights will be taken away from them.

That's an interesting poll result. Would like to see exactly what kind of questions were asked though as well as from whom.

Yes life is complicated but that is what makes life worth living. The problem with the abortion issue is that the opposite extremes seem to get all of the attention.

Perhaps there are bona-fides for performing an abortion but then doesn't that contemplate the matter of discussion, pyhiscal exams, alternate strategies to make a final determination. Isn't this what many people/states are recommending ? Taking it further doesn't such a horrible experience lend itself to thinking about prevention? Isn't this what intelligent thinking people do? Isn't madness sometimes defined as doing the same thing and expecting a different result? Isn't it madness then to suggest that woman have the right to an absolute right to an abortion time and time again?

I opine you decide.

The Florida bill on abortion now under consideration by the FL Senate after passage by the FL House looks like it has a number of holes with respect to the actual extent of scientific knowledge. It is based more on current politics fueled by religious ideas than by common sense or scientific facts. Florida House Passes Abortion Bill Requiring Doctors To Describe Fetal Pain To Pregnant Women

"...there is also research to suggest that despite the presence of such a physical structure within the fetus, it still lacks the capacity to recognize pain. In a 2005 review of the evidence, the American Medical Association concluded that: pain is an emotional and psychological response that requires conscious recognition of a stimulus. Consequently, the capacity for conscious perception of pain can only arise after the thalamocortical pathways begin to function, which may occur in the third trimester around 29-30 weeks gestational age." This is from the Huffingtonpost.com article linked above.

It would be good if RichieLion, my good drinking buddy at the waterhole, would do resarch before posting tripe.http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...are-hypocrites

Roe v. Wade had various cut off periods when abortions should not be performed. It would think that if you asked how many people support the decision Roe v. Wade and explained what the court case ruled that the numbers supporting abortions under certain cirucumstances would be higher. Roe v. Wade - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gallup is tripe. Good one Buggy...............funny as ever.

That was a decision by a court and not by the majority of Americans.

Big difference.

The only ones dying in your brave world are the babies.

when all gets said and done most in the polls including many here on this forum have and are entitled to their opinions on a matter that can ONLY be assessed by those personally involved especially the pregnant one.

Every one else is no more than emotional opinion and arm waving.

And there definitely is no room for expertise or influence of any kind from ANY politician as their only concern on the issue is swayed based on votes available.

btk

Of course. When the tiny percentage of abortions that are performed because of rape, incest or gross extreme fetal deformity are addressed, people by and large will admit they cannot fault the mother's desire to end that pregnancy.

The thing is that the vast majority of abortions are done for convenience.

That's the appalling statistic in this discussion that the pro-abortionist don't like to discuss.

That seems incredibly insenstive Richie. Doubt if many women take the idea of getting an abortion as a matter of convenience.
Va. delegate regrets abortion 'convenience' remark | HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com

The thing is that the vast majority of abortions are done for convenience. Know one in their right mind could swallow this ridiculous statement.

:eek:

The truth is the truth. People lie to themselves all the time. If an abortion is performed for any reason besides the probable death of the mother if the pregnancy continued, or for the instances I mentioned in an above post, what else would you call it except termination of the innocent life for the "convenience" of the mother?

The flip side is that the vast majority of abortions are done in the first trimester when the fetus can resemble anything from a pinprick to a chicken embryo.

The *real* controversies start coming when you get to viability. And science has been pushing THAT window further and further up the calendar over the years. (Not to mention the price tag that goes with those earliest of preemie neonatal care expenses).

I've known a couple of people who've had abortions and was in the room for one myself. I might take some small issue with how wide your definition of "convenience" might go - in our case there were considerable risks that my (now ex) wife didn't want to face as she'd exposed the at-the-time-unknown days-old zygote to a lot of radiation (x-rays) because we didn't know that her birth control had failed.

But it's undeniable that, for so many, an abortion is the "easier" way out.

But for a different perspective - I'd read a statistic that, in the USSR, back in the 70s and 80s, it wasn't uncommon to be able to find a woman who could have had up to 2 dozen abortions since that was considered "just another contraceptive" back then.

Can you imagine the outcry if we'd found someone like that in THIS country? Even the pro-choicers would be ticked off for having someone make them look that irresponsible.

Sorry, I have to reject your rationalization, and your many names for the developing "human being". All these names are used to desensitize the truth of the innocent human being being torn asunder and disposed of like yesterday's trash.

Do we or do we not have a soul? When does the human being growing inside the supposed safe womb of it's mother acquire it's soul?

You have no scientific name or answer for my question; there is only faith.
If you believe in God and the human soul, this discussion about when it is "OK" to terminate the life of this human being is moot.

I've seen news stories about Chen Guangcheng, the blind Chinese activist. But I really didn't know the entire story. Did you? From PJ Media, May 10, 2012:

Capitol Hill got a chilling firsthand account of the forced abortions under China’s one-child policy today as funding of the UN Population Fund came under fire at a House Foreign Affairs subcommittee hearing.

Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Human Rights, noted in his opening statement that the one-child policy has been “enabled” by the UNPF, which was refunded by President Obama in an “indefensible reversal” from Bush-era policy.

Last year, the U.S. gave $165 million to the UNPF, which says it supports “voluntary family planning” in China (where, incidentally, it’s not voluntary).

The hearing centered around the ongoing case of human-rights lawyer Chen Guangcheng, who is still being held in a Beijing hospital along with this family.

Smith called Chen “among the bravest defenders of women’s rights in history.”

As a result of trying to defend women against forced abortions and forced sterilizations, Chen, who escaped from house arrest to the U.S. Embassy last month, has suffered “cruel torture, degrading treatment, unjust incarceration, and multiple beatings,” Smith said.

But it was the last woman to testify on today’s panel that painted a picture of the violence from which Chen was trying to rescue Chinese women.

Mei Shunping, born in Tianjin, China, 20 years before the one-child policy was introduced by the People’s Republic, told the committee that she is just one of many women “whose lives were destroyed by the policy — the women that Chen Guangcheng tried to help so courageously.”

Mei was married in 1981, and gave birth to a son two years later. At the time, women were supposed to automatically get an IUD implanted or husbands were to be sterilized after the first child’s birth. Doctors refused to implant the IUD in Mei, though, for medical reasons.

“Without the IUD, I became the prime target for surveillance by the factory’s Family Planning Commission,” Mei said. “From 1983 to 1990, because of the one-child policy, I had to have five abortions.”

Mei noted the workplace surveillance put in place to prevent unapproved births and the corresponding punishments for getting pregnant.

Continued here:

PJ Media » A Life ‘Destroyed’ by China’s Forced Abortions Tells All to Congress

59% of Americans also said that abortion should be illegal under most circumstances.

59% of Americans: Prohibit Abortion in Most or All Circumstances | CNSNews.com

If you look at the statistics, abortion is a Black genocide.

"[Martin Luther King, Jr.] once said, 'The Negro cannot win as long as he is willing to sacrifice the lives of his children for comfort and safety.' How can the 'Dream' survive if we murder the children? Every aborted baby is like a slave in the womb of his or her mother. The mother decides his or her fate."

Alveda King, “How Can the Dream Survive if We Murder Our Children?”

THAT was enlightening...thank you !!!!

Great post highlighting an icon of the Liberal Establishment who's views seem foreign to everything the Liberal Establishment holds "sacred", if you will.

Thanks for posting.

Abortion kills minority children at more than 3 times the rate of non-Hispanic, white children, Bucco.

According to Guttmacher, a very liberal pro-abortion organization, "Who Has Abortions? • Non-Hispanic white women account for 36% of abortions, non-Hispanic black women for 30%, Hispanic women for 25% and women of other races for 9%."

Now, if you do the math, Black women make up 12.3 percent of the American female population according to the US Census and account for 30 percent of abortions in America. (The CDC puts the number of abortions by Black American women at 36.4 percent of all abortions in America.)

Hispanic women account for 12.5 percent of the American female population and account for 25 percent of abortions in the US.

Non-hispanic, white women account for 69 percent of the American female population, but account for 36 percent of abortion, according to Guttmacher.

Think about this and tell me if the Margaret Sanger's, the founder of Planned Parenthood, dream of using "birth control" as a means of eugenics is working?







Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States

This was just about the most racist post I have read on the forum.

You obviously do not do much reading or understand the previous quotes from the King family !!!!!

This is a bit (quite a bit, actually) over the top. Citing true statistics that the liberal establishment would like to keep in the closet is now racist?

You owe a big apology here.

It's OK to discuss this issue with BK if you have information that invalidates anything she's said, or to give your impression of the facts she presents.

But, to just out and out call her researched post racist??

Not nice my friend; not very nice.

No, it is not madness. Why force a woman to have a child she does not want or can not afford to feed and care for?

The conservatives pretend that there are so many homes waiting for the chance to adopt a child.

I guess we kill the babies that we cannot "feed and take care for"?

This is the argument you favor in support of the killing of innocent babies

Great argument.

Thread has become off topic and requiring too much moderator involvement to maintain. Thread now closed.