Monday, January 26, 2009

72% of America is pro-life

According to CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. Aug. 29-31, 2008. N=1,031 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.
When asked "With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life?"
53% answered pro-choice and 45% answered pro-life. On the surface it would seem the the country is split in half, leaning slightly towards pro-choice. How can I say then that America is vastly pro-life? The answer is in the question asked by the poll. Most people consider themselves pro-choice because they don't understand what pro-choice is. It is the popular politically correct answer to give nowadays.

To be pro-choice one must want choice for abortion to be legal in all situations, at all times. Any desire to restrict abortion is a desire to restrict choice. I ask you why any pro-choicer would want to restrict abortion at all if it is only a blob of tissue living inside the mother. If there is no harm to any human being then there is truly no reason to restrict abortion anymore than there would be reason to restrict a mole removal. Therefore the only reason, realized or otherwise, for restricting abortion for any reason is that one believes, at least at some point in the pregnancy, that there is a person living inside that mother that is worthy of protecting. To find that there is life inside that mother worthy of protecting is a pro-life position.

There are various restrictions that people would like to see on abortion. Some simply want less abortions. But why desire less abortions if there is no harm to anyone? Some want restrictions at later stages of pregnancy. This is a pro-life position at a later stage of pregnancy. Some want restrictions except for rape, incest, or saving the life of the mother. Ok, let's talk about these.

Abortion that saves the life of a mother from imminent danger has always been legal, even when general abortion was illegal. If the mother is in danger of dying and the fetus is not viable, of course we want the mother to live. We just want to make sure that the fetus is given a chance to live too if it is at all possible. Let's be clear though, depression is not imminent danger. hardship is not imminent danger, fear of your boyfriend leaving you is not imminent danger.

Rape and incest exceptions are seemingly inconsistent with a viewpoint that there is a human being inside from the moment of conception. I would agree with that perception. Even with these exceptions there is still a pro-life viewpoint. The reason these exceptions come up is because they are emotionally based. The thought of the pain and unfairness of these situations override the feeling that abortion would be killing a person. Logically it is inconsistent, but the rape and incest exceptions are emotionally driven.

When other polls are given that ask more in depth questions like "Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?" You see a different picture.
According to the Gallup Poll. May 8-11, 2008. N=1,017 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.
28% want abortion legal under any circumstance, 54% want it legal only under certain circumstances (a pro-life position), 17% want abortion illegal in all circumstances.

Only 28% of the country is pro-choice where there are no restrictions on choice. Remember, any restriction on choice is not pro-choice. The only reason for desiring restrictions of any kind is because of a pro-life stance. You are pro-life if you believe there is a person inside the pregnant woman worthy of protection at any time during the pregnancy.

1 comment:

  1. Hi, found your blog from YouTube. I completely agree with you. I especially liked your commentary with respect to "allowing abortions in cases of rape and incest." It is an absolutely emotionally driven stance. But then, who sits around and tries to pinpoint specific stages of fetal development at which a "blob" becomes "human"...I mean, besides a person who wants to justify abortion?