Advertisement

Archive for Saturday, May 16, 2009

Poll: More Americans calling themselves pro-life

May 16, 2009

Advertisement

— A Gallup Poll released Friday found that 51 percent of Americans now call themselves pro-life rather than pro-choice on the issue of abortion, the first time a majority gave that answer in the 15 years that Gallup has asked the question.

The findings, obtained in an annual survey on values and beliefs conducted May 7-10, marked a significant shift from a year ago. A year ago, 50 percent said they were pro-choice and 44 percent pro-life — in the new poll, 42 percent said they were pro-choice.

The new survey showed that Americans remained deeply divided on the legality of abortion — with 23 percent saying it should be illegal in all circumstances, 22 percent saying it should be legal under any circumstances, and 53 percent saying it should be legal only under certain circumstances.

The findings echoed a recent national survey by the Pew Research Center, which reported a sharp decline since last August in those saying abortion should be legal in all or most cases — from 54 percent to 46 percent.

Taken together, the two polls have elated anti-abortion activists, who had been stung by the November election results that placed President Barack Obama and other abortion-rights supporters in power in Washington.

“Ironically, Obama’s radical abortion policies and nominees may have helped make America more pro-life,” said Wendy Wright, president of the conservative advocacy group Concerned Women for America.

The Rev. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, said the poll findings demonstrate that the anti-abortion cause “is a vibrant, growing, youthful movement.”

“We are winning the battle for hearts and minds in our culture on the life issue,” he said.

The president of a leading abortion-rights group, Nancy Keenan of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said the Gallup findings “do not square with the voting patterns in the last two elections cycles.”

“It would be a mistake for anti-choice groups to interpret this one poll as a signal that Americans want even more interference from politicians in their personal, private decisions, including a woman’s right to choose safe, legal abortion,” Keenan said.

Another abortion-rights leader, Planned Parenthood Federation of America president Cecile Richards, questioned the terminology in the Gallup questions.

“The terms pro-choice and pro-life no longer define the parameters of the debate, witnessed by the fact that in the Gallup Poll, a majority of people say they are both pro-life and that abortion should be legal,” Richards said.

She added that most Americans share Obama’s stated goal of reducing the number of unintended pregnancies.

Comments

logicsound04 4 years, 11 months ago

Awww, did notajayhawk get frustrated?

Or is there another reason you started pulling tiny snippets of my comments out of context in a desperate attempt to make yourself feel important by replying with substanceless snark? Actually, don't bother answering, as I'll simply take that as my clue that this interaction has run its course.

I can't even begin to imagine what a bitter, argumentative person you must be in real life. Or perhaps you just act that way on here for entertainment. Either way, it's sad.

0

barrypenders 4 years, 11 months ago

I wonder why Obama is married? Most men like him have multiple females and dady babies with a couple.

Obama is cutting edge amoung men like him,

Way to go man. Talk the talk. Don't walk the walk.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 11 months ago

logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…

"You're falling into my trap"

You couldn't set a trap that would cause a one-legged gnat to stumble, 'logic'boy.

"I agree that what I'm saying doesn't hold water"

The first true comment you've posted.

"instead of arguing for argument's sake"

If I'm arguing over nothing, you're arguing for - what, again?

"I'm making a point from the perspective of the anti-abortion philosophy."

So - you're saying you've made a fool of yourself deliberately because you were pretending to argue the opposite side of the issue. Even for you, that's a heap of spin, Mr. Maytag.

"you can't declare that you are opposed to abortions because they “end a life” if you are going to turn around and argue that there are circumstances where it is okay to end that life."

and

"Impossible? No. I stand by my use of the word “inconvenient”. ... Not impossible. Difficult."

The impossibility, dimbulb, is in saving both lives, not in the choice of which to save. In any of the dilemmas I postulated, a choice can, must, and eventually will be made, either actively or passively. But there is no dissonance in someone claiming to be "pro-life" and choosing which of two lives to save when it is impossible to save both.

I seem to recall you saying a long time ago that your fiance was a med student or doctor or some such. If they're still putting up with you, ask them this question: If a physician faced with two critical emergency cases only has the time and resources to save one, does it violate their commitment to the preservation of life to allow one to die in order to save the other?

(BTW: Did you know that the original oath included the words "I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion?")

"But that scenario (life of the mother vs. the fetus) doesn't really completely address the point I'm making—what about in cases of rape or incest?"

Gee, I don't know - maybe you can point out where I mentioned either of those cases?

"By the way, I can't help but wonder what makes you feel so insecure that you must assume I've never made a difficult decision in my life."

Nothing insecure about it - as a matter of fact, I'm pretty secure in that belief. Your insistence on believing that everyting has a black-and-white, yes-or-no, absolute answer pretty much gives it away.

"No bait and switch—both quotes dealt with the same issue."

Both quotes may have been on the "same issue" (no duh? pretty much every comment on this thread falls into that category, genius), they differ significantly. And in any case, you quoted one statement, then tried to make it appear you were referring to another (posted 7 hours after you called him an extremist) when you said "Here is his quote." If that's not a bait-and-switch...

Just keep spinning, just keep spinning...

0

MyName 4 years, 11 months ago

It's completely ridiculous how the anti-abortionists are trying to paint the President, who is only wanting to keep things the way they've been for 30 years, as the "real" radical.

The only people "blinking" in this debate are the ones who bother to listen to the radical nutjobs on both sides of this issue. I mean haven't we decided this issue decades ago?

0

Agnostick 4 years, 11 months ago

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Barack Hussein Obama has called for a 'truce” in abortion discussions.

In the Battle For Life, the Bad Guys have just blinked.

Keep up the good work, people!


Source?

0

logicsound04 4 years, 11 months ago

"Or impossible, as the example I gave illustrated (and you so casually dismissed - how nice that your own life has never been encumbered by choices more difficult than which gut English course to take next semester). In such a case, either way you are choosing for someone to die, and it makes a person no less “pro-life” to accept the fact that someone is inevitably not going to survive."


Impossible? No. I stand by my use of the word "inconvenient". Because that's what it is when facing a choice between saving a fetus and saving a pregnant woman--one must be given priority, and if both are sacred, then that choice is extremely difficult. Not impossible. Difficult.

But that scenario (life of the mother vs. the fetus) doesn't really completely address the point I'm making--what about in cases of rape or incest? Most people (even anti-abortion advocates) would agree that those are cases where abortion is permissable, which again returns me to the question--if a fetus' life is sacred, then how can it be tossed aside just because it was created via unsavory means?

By the way, I can't help but wonder what makes you feel so insecure that you must assume I've never made a difficult decision in my life. Does it make you feel superior to imagine yourself as more experienced or "well-traveled" than I?

============================================================================

"You called him an extremist for saying “birth control abortions are wrong.” Nice attempt at a bait-and-switch,"


No bait and switch--both quotes dealt with the same issue. The first and second quotes go hand in hand, as the two together are what establish the extremism of his opinion: birth control abortions are wrong, and that any abortion that isn't done for the health of the mother is a "birth control abortion".

0

logicsound04 4 years, 11 months ago

"Only to those of extremely limited minds that insist on seeing everything in absolutist terms. If what you're saying made any sense whatsoever, 'logic'sound, then the very law legalizing abortions is contradictory and 'dissonant' - after all, late term abortions are legal only in certain circumstances. Every law, every regulation, every policy has exceptions and is relative to context"


You're falling into my trap, notajayhawk and the more you continue to hem and haw about how I'm a narrow-minded absolutist, the more foolish you look.

I agree that what I'm saying doesn't hold water--but if you'd pay attention (instead of arguing for argument's sake) you would notice that I'm making a point from the perspective of the anti-abortion philosophy. I'm not arguing MY personal beliefs. The most common reason given for being opposed to abortions is the fact that it is wrong to end a human life--hell, isn't that where the term "pro-life" is derived?

I understand that laws have exceptions. In fact, it is the very nature of law--to make rules and regulations that allow certain behaviors and prohibit others. My goal here is to impugne the "moral justice" argument of the anti-abortion movement: you can't declare that you are opposed to abortions because they "end a life" if you are going to turn around and argue that there are circumstances where it is okay to end that life.

I guess what I'm getting at here is that the anti-abortion movement wants to declare itself the arbiter of what is considered "morally just", and be the ones who declare what exceptions are okay. They shout about abortions being "murders" and those who perform abortions being "baby killers", all of which makes absolutely no sense if the exceptions of mother's health or rape, etc. are permissable. Or are you really arguing that it's okay to murder so long as it will potentially save the mother's life. Or is it still considered "murder" in that case?

If the goal was to have a discussion on WHEN it's okay to have an abortion and why, that would be one thing. I think my approach would do very well in that context, as my fundamental argument is that while fetuses have inherent value and should be protected to a degree, their value must always be secondary to that of living, breathing individuals like you and I. Given that the fetus has inherent value, I am okay with restricting late-term abortions (see, not an absolutist), I just think you need to establish a consistent rule, rather than a process that involves judging every individual scenario to determine if they pass the "morally just" test.

0

grammaddy 4 years, 11 months ago

I consider myself both pro-life and pro-choice. Pro-life because I am against the death penalty, war and would not have an abortion myself. Pro- choice because I believe everyone needs to make that choice for themselves and I would never want anyone to tell me what I can or cannot do with my own body. If you don't have a uterus, you don't get to tell me what to do with mine.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 11 months ago

feeble (Anonymous) says…

"notajayhawk already provided the url that answers this question, but did not complete the answer. 77% of Americans want some from of abortion to remain legal, whereas 23% of Americans want all forms of abortion to be illegal, without exception."

Nice parsing. But the wording of the question leans the other way ("only under certain circumstances"). That means only 22% of Americans believe it should be unrestricted, while 78% believe it should be forbidden or restricted. In other words, more than three-quarters of the population believes 'abortion-on-demand' should not be allowed.

0

beobachter 4 years, 11 months ago

And racism is still alive and thriving.

0

Marion Lynn 4 years, 11 months ago

Barack Hussein Obama has called for a 'truce" in abortion discussions.

In the Battle For Life, the Bad Guys have just blinked.

Keep up the good work, people!

0

Pilgrim2 4 years, 11 months ago

pace (Anonymous) says…

Pilgrim 2 didn't say anything.


Opinions vary.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 11 months ago

logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…

"Ahem…you don't think it's dissonant to believe that abortions are wrong because they end a life but also believe that they should be allowed?"

Only to those of extremely limited minds that insist on seeing everything in absolutist terms. If what you're saying made any sense whatsoever, 'logic'sound, then the very law legalizing abortions is contradictory and 'dissonant' - after all, late term abortions are legal only in certain circumstances. Every law, every regulation, every policy has exceptions and is relative to context. There are plenty of people who, in our current day (and during times such as the 60's and 70's) who labeled themselves as "anti-war" that might have had no objection whatsoever to WWII or a similar circumstance where this country was attacked. Even a Hindu that believes all life is sacred might make an exception if a wild animal were attacking their child. There are no absolutes, and the presence of exceptions does not render any rule incongruous.

I sincerely wish you luck in your pursuit of that world where everything falls into tidy little black-and-white, although it's a sad little world - the rest of us can see in color.

"Oh…so the fetus' life is sacred, until it becomes inconvenient or difficult to treat it as such."

Or impossible, as the example I gave illustrated (and you so casually dismissed - how nice that your own life has never been encumbered by choices more difficult than which gut English course to take next semester). In such a case, either way you are choosing for someone to die, and it makes a person no less "pro-life" to accept the fact that someone is inevitably not going to survive.

"Gnome declared that any method of prevention other than abstinence is wrong. Here is his quote:"

But that wasn't the quote you cited in your response that drew my subsequent response, was it, 'logic'sound? You called him an extremist for saying “birth control abortions are wrong.” Nice attempt at a bait-and-switch, but your post is still up there to read, if you forgot what you were arguing.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 11 months ago

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

"Also, the ones who (like one of our former attorney generals and his supporters) insist on an absolute prohibition of abortion, with absolutely no exceptions, even when a physician determines it necessary to save the life of a woman."

Pretty sure I said that in a subsequent post.

"Not surprisingly, more than half (53%) of respondents to the poll, fall in the middle: that abortion should be legal in certain circumstances."

Well, actually, it said "legal only under certain circumstances" [emphasis mine], slightly different connotation.


jonas_opines (Anonymous) says…

"your notion that I'm being somehow above anybody but perhaps you is really rather specious"

Uh huh. I'm sure you weren't being superior, insolent, condescending, and self-important when you said:

"Aaahahahahahahahaha!!!!! Did you actually put those two sentences next to each other and think there was no contradiction there? Bias has warped your brain past the point of no return on this issue, you and gnome both. It would be best if you just admitted it to yourself. Maybe then you'd drop the notion of your own supremacy."

Again, get over yourself. Everyone else already is.

0

staff04 4 years, 11 months ago

"Birth control abortions that's about 95-98% of abortions in this country."

Oh really? I'm curious to know where this statistic came from gnome...

If you made it up, please, announce yourself a dramatist and liar...

0

madameX 4 years, 11 months ago

With all due respect, living a wild life and managing to avoid unwanted pregnancies is frequently a matter of luck as much as anything else. It's not really fair to say "I was lucky, how dare you let yourself not be lucky."

I'd also draw a distinction between using abortion as a primary means of birth control (meaning not using anything at all and then having an abortion if a pregnancy happens) and having your primary means of birth control fail and being stuck with an unwanted pregnancy as a result. I have no idea how the statistics would break down, but I strongly suspect the former category is pretty small and the majority fall into the latter. Yes, women in the former category are probably abusing the right to choose, but if every right that a few people abused was taken away we probably wouldn't have any rights left.

0

bearded_gnome 4 years, 11 months ago

Birth control abortions that's about 95-98% of abortions in this country. the other % is the very rare pregnancies: rape; otherwise girl/woman can't give consent; very rare life of the mother.
my personal feeling is that these should continue to be legal, only these. however, I'll also note that Mrs. Gnome herself experienced abortion as a teen, and indeed as so often happens the abortion really served to protect the abuser.


Jonas,

yes, you and I have met and I will give you a straight answer. Nota, while using some exagerated language, is correctly amplifying my point regarding birth control abortions. indeed, you met me after I became a christian. but I had a bit of a wild life before age 25. still managed to avoid having any unwanted pregnancies. and in the context above my point is that if I can, so can anybody else.

using an epithet "Taliban" is truly extreme and by way of humor I was trying to identify that.


U.S. Constitution, U.S. Declaration of Independence both start by recognizing the right to life, because without it all other rights are moot.

is radicalism in pursuit of human rights warranted, certainly. am I opposed to slavery for the same reason, you bet. oh, you didn't know that slavery still occurs in todays world? try southern Sudan. try sex workers in Thailand and even in this country. try muslim women, even in this country, who are the second, third or fourth wife of a "husband."

Jonas, there's your answer. and a nod to Notajayhawk, thanks bro.

0

madameX 4 years, 11 months ago

Well how about that. The CDC is a liberal organization. Who knew?

0

barrypenders 4 years, 11 months ago

Nonmarital birth rates are highest for Hispanic women followed by black women. Rates for non-Hispanic white and Asian or Pacific Islander women are much lower.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db18.htm

Thanks for the skinny on wiki Agnostick. Its a really up to date, factual web location.

I posted this liberal site for your perusal.

0

jaywalker 4 years, 11 months ago

"if a woman chooses not to have a child, then she shouldn't engage in acts that could lead to pregnancy!"

Spoken like a man that never has to worry about giving birth. Weren't you on the Mayflower?

0

Agnostick 4 years, 11 months ago

barryracebaiter...

The responsibility for reducing unintended pregnancies is just as much an issue for men, as well as women. Race has nothing to do with it.

Nice try at race baiting, though!

Do some homework, please:

--Ag

0

barrypenders 4 years, 11 months ago

Obama's great quote:

“So let’s work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies",

Since white women are having 1.2ish babies in this country and the Chineese are limiting families to one baby is Obama talking about all other races of women?

I was just wondering what ladies Obama is refering to that need to reduce the "unintended pregnancies".

0

TobiasFunke 4 years, 11 months ago

“There's is nothing at all contradictory about identifying oneself as “pro-life” and saying that “it should be legal only under certain circumstances.”

You are pro-choice.

0

feeble 4 years, 11 months ago

G_E says… I would be interested to see how the questions for this poll were worded ========================== notajayhawk already provided the url that answers this question, but did not complete the answer. 77% of Americans want some from of abortion to remain legal, whereas 23% of Americans want all forms of abortion to be illegal, without exception.

So, there is a slight trend toward the pro-life camp, but it is not a complete rejection of legal abortion. I think the poll shows that most Americans believe there are some circumstances where abortion should be permissible.

0

mom_of_three 4 years, 11 months ago

G -E You are very correct in that pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion.
Pro-choice means the decision is up to the woman/couple involved and no one else.
I don't know if I could choose to have an abortion, but I have absolutely no right in making/affecting that decision for someone else. Because that person has the right to make the decision for themselves.

0

Marcy McGuffie 4 years, 11 months ago

kmat (Anonymous) says…

what the hell is a “birth control abortions”? Is this moron saying that anyone on the pill is having an abortion each month?


kmat - I think that term just means someone who uses abortion as "birth control." There are some gals (a very small percentage of those who have had abortions, I would guess) who habitually end up pregnant and end up having several abortions, throughout their reproductive years.

0

salad 4 years, 11 months ago

Mr_Nancy_Boy_To_You (Tom Shewmon) says…

This is the pinnacle of the Tom Shewmon mindset: I got mine and to hell with everyone else.

Yes, Tom Shewmon, the sheeple of “I got mine and I don't care what anyone else gets or doesn't get”.

fixed

0

kmat 4 years, 11 months ago

what the hell is a "birth control abortions"? Is this moron saying that anyone on the pill is having an abortion each month?

And those that think unless you want to have a baby you have to be abstinant - why don't you start teaching your sons to never have sex until they want to create a child. Huh? No, you'd rather bitch at a woman than have men practice bc.

0

pace 4 years, 11 months ago

Pilgrim 2 didn't say anything.

0

Agnostick 4 years, 11 months ago

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…

"The 'radicals,' Be.O., are the ones who (like our former governor and her supporters) insist on an absolute right to abortion, with absolutely no restrictions."


Also, the ones who (like one of our former attorney generals and his supporters) insist on an absolute prohibition of abortion, with absolutely no exceptions, even when a physician determines it necessary to save the life of a woman.

Not surprisingly, more than half (53%) of respondents to the poll, fall in the middle: that abortion should be legal in certain circumstances.

The first step on the path of this achievable goal is the reduction of unwanted pregnancies.

"So let us work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions, let's reduce unintended pregnancies. Let's make adoption more available. Let's provide care and support for women who do carry their children to term. Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded not only in sound science, but also in clear ethics, as well as respect for the equality of women. Those are things we can do."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104226887

Agnostick agnostick@excite.com

0

logicsound04 4 years, 11 months ago

"There's is nothing at all contradictory about identifying oneself as “pro-life” and saying that “it should be legal only under certain circumstances.”"


Ahem...you don't think it's dissonant to believe that abortions are wrong because they end a life but also believe that they should be allowed?

This is what I don't get about the "pro-life" movement--if you believe a fetus to be an individual with a right to life, how can you justify exceptions to their right to life?

Isn't that what pro-choice advocates get nailed for all the time? Subverting the fetus' right to life in favor of the mother's choice? If the pro-life movement can draw a line in the sand, then why is their line so much more valid than the line drawn by pro-choice supporters?

==========================

"a husband given the choice of losing the woman he loved enough to marry or someone he's never met might agree that abortion would be allowable to save the mother's life, even though he is otherwise pro-life."


Oh...so the fetus' life is sacred, until it becomes inconvenient or difficult to treat it as such.

I agree that a husband would probably feel that way and I think he is entirely justified in placing more value on his living, breathing wife than an unborn fetus. In fact, the entire crux of my reasoning is that while a fetus posesses inherent value, it's value is secondary to the value of one who is already living their life.

Again I am left to wonder why the anti-abortion movement feels it has a monopoly on drawing the line between acceptable and unacceptable. At least the line I am drawing is philosophically consistent (i.e. living humans always take precedence over unborn fetuses). The "pro-life" movement wants to be the final say-so on when an abortion is morally justified or not.

===========================

"The “extremists” are those of extremely limited intellectual capacity who insist that everything has a black-or-white, yes-or-no, absolute answer that applies in all circumstances at all times for everyone."


Gnome declared that any method of prevention other than abstinence is wrong. Here is his quote:

"if a woman chooses not to have a child, then she shouldn't engage in acts that could lead to pregnancy!"

In other words, he views any act of sex that is not designed to produce a pregnancy as wrong. Seems like a fairly black-or-white, absolute answer to me....maybe if you'd actually read his comments instead of automatically arguing on his side because I happened to be the one criticizing him, you wouldn't look so foolish.

Furthermore, we again run into this issue of "pro-lifers" only being "pro-life" in certain situations--so it's wrong to abort a fetus because it is an individual life, but as long as the mother has a reason YOU consider to be morally just, it's okay to end that life? Again with the cognitive dissonance.

0

logicsound04 4 years, 11 months ago

"yes, read the context."


There is no "context" for the nonsensical term "birth control abortions".

That's like saying there is a context for the term "flat earth". You are an extremist.

0

jonas_opines 4 years, 11 months ago

I'm afraid, notajayhawk, that I don't see anywhere here that I've suggested that either my perspective or opinion were correct for everybody, (or, for that matter, where I've made any statements that could be taken as universal or universally representative) so your notion that I'm being somehow above anybody but perhaps you is really rather specious, a common result when you thoughtlessly poach somebody else's words. But I'm equally afraid that when you so regularly condense complicated situations, positions and arguments into such condescendingly simplistic terms, it's just very, very difficult to Not be above you.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 11 months ago

G_E (Anonymous) says…

"I would be interested to see how the questions for this poll were worded"

With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life?

Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/118399/More-Americans-Pro-Life-Than-Pro-Choice-First-Time.aspx

0

Pilgrim2 4 years, 11 months ago

Polly_Gomer (Anonymous) says…

Um, did Pilgrim2 say something?

No?

OK, just checking.


Hey, Richard, it's against the rules to have two concurrent profiles on this board. Last name fits perfectly, though.

0

Pilgrim2 4 years, 11 months ago

logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…

“Since this is the first time they've come out on the losing end of the poll, I'll bet this is the first time they've ever questioned the terminology, too.”

––––––

It just goes to show that “pro-life” is a meaningless term, invented by the anti-abortion movement to imply that they have 'good' on their side. Accurate terminology would be “anti-abortion” and “pro-choice”.


Thanks for proving my point, illogical.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 11 months ago

jonas_opines (Anonymous) says…

So you're saying what - that just because you were too rushed, too drunk, or too inconsiderate to make your way to the bathroom and get a condom before running out to have sex in the parking lot IS a good reason for an abortion?

I said nothing about that being the typical pro-choice person or the typical person who avails themselves of an abortion. I merely stated that while there may be some reasons that justify an abortion, that wasn't one of them. And using it as a birth control method, as gnome said, is not really justifiable when there are better methods available. Some of the reasons for that have nothing to do with morality - like for instance a condom is slightly less risky than a surgical procedure.

Speaking of "your own supremacy," get over yourself.

0

G_E 4 years, 11 months ago

The problem with the "pro-life" terminology is that it implies that those of us who are pro-choice are pro-abortion, which is just simply not true.

I would be interested to see how the questions for this poll were worded, because I would guess that if it gave options regarding restrictions on abortion's legality, those supporting it would increase - just in varying degrees of permissiveness. Most self-proclaimed "pro-life" people I know DO make concessions for things like rape, incest, and health of the mother. Which actually makes them pro-choice, even though they don't want to call themselves as such.

0

flamingdragon 4 years, 11 months ago

as tom always sez: if you are against abortion, then don't have one. WoW! God bless! WOWS!

0

Polly_Gomer 4 years, 11 months ago

Um, did Pilgrim2 say something?

No?

OK, just checking.

0

jonas_opines 4 years, 11 months ago

bearded_gnome (Anonymous) says…

"and, Boozo illustrates the abundant tolerance of Lawrence's far left loons. thanks Boozo, you are still useful as a museum exhibit."

And Notajayhawk showed how much tolerance your identified side (using your paraphrased words, no less!) have as well. If you're going to call Bozo on being intolerant or hateful, shouldn't you be more inclusive, at least if you don't want to appear like a hypocrite?

It's just a tendency I've noticed with you Gnome (and, of course, with multiple others, but I'm asking you since we've met and I think I might get a straight answer), to yell about hateful speech from the left while condoning and participating in just as bad yourself. Are you aware of it, Gnome?

0

jonas_opines 4 years, 11 months ago

"There is nothing “extremist” about gnome's statement that you objected to . . . He said that just because you were too rushed, too drunk, or too inconsiderate to make your way to the bathroom and get a condom before running out to have sex in the parking lot isn't a good enough reason."

Aaahahahahahahahaha!!!!! Did you actually put those two sentences next to each other and think there was no contradiction there? Bias has warped your brain past the point of no return on this issue, you and gnome both. It would be best if you just admitted it to yourself. Maybe then you'd drop the notion of your own supremacy.

0

danemary 4 years, 11 months ago

!!!!!Notre Dame____Shame----Shame!!!!!

0

BigPrune 4 years, 11 months ago

We better start being pro-life, because our society will no longer exist in the future. We don't have enough kids per couple anymore.

Here is a link: It is not derogatory towards Muslims, it's that the West took it upon ourselves to stop having children and Muslims did not. After doing some limited research on the information in the video, the facts is the facts. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5h...

0

pace 4 years, 11 months ago

They should do a poll on how people feel about the wingnuts promoting propaganda drivel instead of sound information and full health care access. The anti science thing is not pro-choice, it is pro moron. Sick of how the cults aren't taxed.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 11 months ago

"Soaking your testicles in really hot water can kill your sperms."

And marinating them in jalapeña juice is even more effective.

0

75x55 4 years, 11 months ago

blah, blah, blah... polls, shmolls.

Vote your beliefs and move on down the road.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 11 months ago

beobachter;

I believe my definition holds for extremists of all varieties (even without the "limited intellectual capacity" qualifier). Whether one thinks abortion should always, always be allowed without any restriction whatsoever or always, always be prohibited no matter what the circumstances, both views are extremist.

Incidentally, since the theoretical orientation of my professional practice is rational-emotive, I believe as Ellis did that absolutism is irrational and contributes to psychological distress.

0

beobachter 4 years, 11 months ago

nota. think your statement exactly shows what anti-abortion extremists are. The “extremists” are those of extremely limited intellectual capacity who insist that everything has a black-or-white, yes-or-no, absolute answer that applies in all circumstances at all times for everyone." Disagree?

0

Cooky_the_Cook 4 years, 11 months ago

Soaking your testicles in really hot water can kill your sperms. It has potential as a birth control method. I seen it on TV.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 11 months ago

logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…

"In other words, some 25% of those polled identify themselves as pro-life, but don't see abortion as conflicting with that viewpoint."

Sorry, 'logic,' but the only cognitive dissonance here seems to be echoing around in the heads of absolutists like your esteemed self. There's is nothing at all contradictory about identifying oneself as "pro-life" and saying that "it should be legal only under certain circumstances." Or maybe you know something the rest of us don't, such as what those "certain circumstances" are?

Even Ghandi or the Pope might agree that it's okay to gun down a terrorist covered in plastic explosives before he reaches a school bus. Similarly, a husband given the choice of losing the woman he loved enough to marry or someone he's never met might agree that abortion would be allowable to save the mother's life, even though he is otherwise pro-life.

There is nothing "extremist" about gnome's statement that you objected to (“birth control abortions are wrong”). He didn't say all abortion is always wrong under any circumstances. He said that just because you were too rushed, too drunk, or too inconsiderate to make your way to the bathroom and get a condom before running out to have sex in the parking lot isn't a good enough reason. The "extremists" are those of extremely limited intellectual capacity who insist that everything has a black-or-white, yes-or-no, absolute answer that applies in all circumstances at all times for everyone. Like you, for instance.

Just because you don't personally understand the term pro-life doesn't make it "meaningless."

0

beobachter 4 years, 11 months ago

jc, but your ex made the choice. It wasn't forced on her like the anti-abortion nutcases want. If it was up to them, she would have had no choice.

0

jumpin_catfish 4 years, 11 months ago

No worries gnomemeiser, on TV bozo was just a creepy clown. My ex-mother-in-law tried to convince my now ex-wife to have an abortion which, I, the father had no knowledge of at the time. To my Ex's credit she said no. Today, many years later, that baby teaches school, a math teacher and is far more liberal than her father and I'm so glad she is. Life, after all, is more important then anything in the world.

0

bearded_gnome 4 years, 11 months ago

and, Boozo illustrates the abundant tolerance of Lawrence's far left loons. thanks Boozo, you are still useful as a museum exhibit.


watch it Jumpin, Boozo will label you Taliban! how dare you hold such an opinion!

0

jumpin_catfish 4 years, 11 months ago

Do the unborn have the right to choice? Endangered snails have more rights than they do but what's the big deal they're only a babies after all. Maybe someone reading this blog today is considering the abortion option. I hope they will think again for a baby's sake.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 11 months ago

Keyes has bailed on the Republicans, and has been unable to find another party that will take him. He's been busy trying to found his own party, and I have the perfect name for it-- The American Taliban Party.

0

bearded_gnome 4 years, 11 months ago

Role model! wow yes Ronda!

how different our country would be is Keyes were president! and I bet we'd be safer from terrorism too.

I heard Alan Keyes interviewed on Fox news this morning. what an inspiring man. he said plainly he believes the President of Notre Dame is sinning according to Catholic doctrine.

0

Ronda Miller 4 years, 11 months ago

denak, good points...and gnome, I enjoyed reading the link...few people are willing to stand up for their beliefs is such a manner. He is a great role model for all of us - regardless of which side you are - regardless of topic.

0

bearded_gnome 4 years, 11 months ago

LS04: yes, read the context. if I can avoid unwanted pregnancies, so can you and others.

there is no excuse for birth control abortions. none. if a woman chooses not to have a child, then she shouldn't engage in acts that could lead to pregnancy! simple, eh?


Ronda et al: a great man http://loyaltoliberty.blogspot.com/

Alan Keyes' blog. what a fine example for us all to follow. he doesn't just pay lipservice to being "prolife" and then vote for the focus of proabortion evil in our society today. and he's been arrested a couple of times now at Notre Dame. Alan Keyes=rock on man!


bronze, if the terrorists use human shields to hide behind, then who's fault is it? the people holding them hostage for their terrorist aims, or the people who want to stop the terrorists? try focusing your blame in the right direction, and also avoid trying to highjack a thread. bronze=cool/ocean/ariadne/rusty2/spiderman/coltrane et al, he's gone through seven different times being banned from this forum, so you know what he says has got to have the ring of truth to it! riiiiiiiight.

0

bronze 4 years, 11 months ago

everyone is pro-life but supports sending drone missles into primitive villages to kill civilians on the other side of the planet?

0

denak 4 years, 11 months ago

I can't speak for everyone, but I am willing to bet that most people who are pro-life are also not anti-sex. Nor are they anti-contraception or against comprehensive sexual education.

And for the record, breastfeeding is not birth control. Neither is the 'pull-out method"

Breastfeeding supresses fertility but it does not prevent pregnancy. It can be effective if three criteria are met

1) The baby is less than 6 months 2) Mom has not resumed menstrating and 3) Mom is a full-time breastfeeder.

But since most women start menstrating again within one to two months after having their child, using breastfeeding as a form of birth control is a very risky option.

Two, the "pull-out" method (aka withdrawal) is a complete farce. If you use the withdrawal method, you have a 25% chance of getting pregnant withing a year. 1/4 of a teaspoon of seman can have up to 100 million sperm just waiting to go swiming and since men have semen in their pre-cum, even if he did pull out prior to ejaculation, he can still get a woman pregnant.

Just a little FYI.

Dena

0

Ronda Miller 4 years, 11 months ago

Nice to see those of you on here in support of pro-life...Those of us "you will see" for those who cannot yet see or speak. Information and choices for life are key....

nota, prospector, gnome, tange. etc., I appreciate your support...perhaps we need to speak out more with our current President's stance.....

0

tangential_reasoners_anonymous 4 years, 11 months ago

"More Americans calling themselves pro-life"

Inevitable.

(You will see... those of you who can.)

0

logicsound04 4 years, 11 months ago

"birth control abortions are wrong."


Speaking of anti-abortion extremists.

==========================

"Since this is the first time they've come out on the losing end of the poll, I'll bet this is the first time they've ever questioned the terminology, too."


This is also the first time the poll has provided evidence of major cognitive dissonance.

51% of those polled are "pro-life", but 75% of those polled believe that abortions should be legal and available in at least some circumstances.

In other words, some 25% of those polled identify themselves as pro-life, but don't see abortion as conflicting with that viewpoint. I would think it would be worrisome to the anti-abortion advocates that there are so many people who identify themselves as pro-life, but have no interest in defending that "life". At least those of us that identify ourselves as pro-choice take that view because we don't see a fetus and a living individual as having the same status.

It just goes to show that "pro-life" is a meaningless term, invented by the anti-abortion movement to imply that they have 'good' on their side. Accurate terminology would be "anti-abortion" and "pro-choice".

0

Tom Shewmon 4 years, 11 months ago

This is the pinnacle of the liberal mindset: I got mine (my life) and to hell with everyone else (an unborn fetus).

Yes, liberals, the crowd of "I got mine and I don't care what anyone else gets or doesn't get".

Wow!

0

barrypenders 4 years, 11 months ago

The fewer liberals the better I always say.

Maybe Obama will print money for choicy stuff too!

0

barrypenders 4 years, 11 months ago

The more hotties the better I always say.

0

purplesage 4 years, 11 months ago

And we elected Obama? And Notre Dame invites him to give the commencement address and bestows an honorary degree? Incongruitites abound.

I hope the poll is correct. And I hope people will begin to connect beliefs with actions.

0

bearded_gnome 4 years, 11 months ago

now lawnmowerman is an expert here too?

amazing.


indeed, people are learning that life is absolute.

birth control abortions are wrong.

I've lived almost 50 years without causing an "unwanted pregnancy," so anybody can too if they choose.


you go girl, Ronda!

0

Pilgrim2 4 years, 11 months ago

"Only you can decide what is best for you. And we are here to help."


"We," Richard? Did you turn in your lawn mower for a W-2 from Planned Parenthood?

0

Pilgrim2 4 years, 11 months ago

Another abortion-rights leader, Planned Parenthood Federation of America president Cecile Richards, questioned the terminology in the Gallup questions.


Since this is the first time they've come out on the losing end of the poll, I'll bet this is the first time they've ever questioned the terminology, too. I'll bet the terminology was just fine in years past. Ya think?

0

beobachter 4 years, 11 months ago

yes, marion, we don't listen to you and those with your mindset.

0

Boeing 4 years, 11 months ago

I got to merrill for my safe-sex advice

0

Marion Lynn 4 years, 11 months ago

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…

Strange how this story isn't getting much attention… wonder why…

Strange, but these polls would appear to disagree somewhat with the values expressed by the fine folks of Larryville"

Marion writes:

Larryvillians have values?

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 11 months ago

I'd say these poll results are rather ambiguous/ambivalent, just like the position a large percentage of the population takes on this issue.

But one thing I can say for certain-- if you want to see these poll results get a whole lot less ambiguous, just enact a whole lot of laws significantly restricting a woman's right to choose.

0

Richard Heckler 4 years, 11 months ago

Are people pro life or anti sex?

Don't all parents preach abstinence initially?

I've never met anyone who was pro abortion.

If stopping unwanted pregnancies is the concern about all that can be done is educate aka:

Birth control allows us to prevent pregnancy and plan the timing of pregnancy.

* Birth Control Effectiveness Chart
* Abstinence
* Birth Control Implant (Implanon)
* Birth Control Patch (Ortho Evra)
* Birth Control Pill
* Birth Control Vaginal Ring (NuvaRing)
* Birth Control Shot (Depo-Provera)
* Birth Control Sponge (Today Sponge)
* Breastfeeding
* Cervical Cap (FemCap)
* Condom
* Diaphragm
* Emergency Contraception
* Female Condom
* Fertility Awareness-Based Methods (FAMs)
* IUD
* Outercourse
* Spermicide
* Sterilization for Women
* Vasectomy
* Withdrawal (Pull Out Method)

People have used birth control methods for thousands of years. Today, we have many safe and effective birth control methods available to us.

All of us who need birth control want to find the method that is best for us. And each of us has different needs when choosing a method. If you are trying to choose, learning about each method may help you make your decision. Use the list of birth control methods above to read about the methods.

Only you can decide what is best for you. And we are here to help. A staff member at your local Planned Parenthood health center can discuss all of your birth control options with you and help you get the birth control you need.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control-4211.htm

0

Andrew Stahmer 4 years, 11 months ago

Murdering an innocent life is NEVER an acceptable "alternative". Life was never meant to be disposable. Never. Period.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 11 months ago

beobachter (Anonymous) says…

"That's where the anti-abortion fanatics turn off a lot of people."

Just as insisting that abortion should be "on-demand" and have absolutely no restrictions placed on it is where the pro-abortion fanatics turn off a lot of people.

And from the swing in the polls, it looks like the pro-abortion fanatics are ahead in the turning-people-off department.

0

denak 4 years, 11 months ago

I think that what this poll shows is that most people know that a woman is not pregnant with a blob of tissue but a living, human being and that abortion, for whatever reason, takes away that individual's right to life.

Also, I think what this poll shows is that people are tired of how rigid BOTH sides are in this debate and that a more reasoned approach is needed.

Dena

0

prospector 4 years, 11 months ago

Ronda, opinions are like you know what, everybody's got one. I hear you and recall some ugly things said, but who needs to tell you "sticks and stones..."? There are some rabid opinions on both sides and you learn to ignore the wackos and debate the issue. So "keep on keepin' on" there lady!

===================

Ding Ding Ding

Abortion LJW+++ Round 1482

"Another abortion-rights leader, Planned Parenthood Federation of America president Cecile Richards, questioned the terminology in the Gallup questions.

“The terms pro-choice and pro-life no longer define the parameters of the debate, witnessed by the fact that in the Gallup Poll, a majority of people say they are both pro-life and that abortion should be legal,” Richards said."

It appears that majority rules and has the law on it's side.

0

yourworstnightmare 4 years, 11 months ago

The best thing that those opposed to abortion can do is to stop unwanted pregnancies. As long as there are unplanned and unwanted pregnancies, abortion will exist, whether legal or not.

0

beobachter 4 years, 11 months ago

But, Rhonda, but not all alternatives fit all women. Who are we to say she must choose an alternative? That's where the anti-abortion fanatics turn off a lot of people.

0

Ronda Miller 4 years, 11 months ago

It is a pity that I have been made to feel ostracized for clearly stating that I am pro life...I couldn't believe it. I love/like babies, want them to live....and I am to be tarred and feathered...Now that is a sad state of affairs. People need to wake up and realize what is happening...there are so many alternatives to abortion...and all of them are better alternatives.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 11 months ago

Confrontation (Anonymous) says…

"I wonder who they're polling. If they're doing it by phone, and most people don't have a home phone anymore, then this is useless."

Pretty sure Gallup knows a little more about how to get an accurate poll result than you do. If anything, their final poll for the presidential election suggests their polling sample may be skewed more towards the liberal side.

But hey, maybe you're right - polls are meaningless, so I guess we have no reason to believe Obama's doing a good job, either.

0

Confrontation 4 years, 11 months ago

I wonder who they're polling. If they're doing it by phone, and most people don't have a home phone anymore, then this is useless.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 11 months ago

The 'radicals,' Be.O., are the ones who (like our former governor and her supporters) insist on an absolute right to abortion, with absolutely no restrictions.

0

beobachter 4 years, 11 months ago

It is possible to be pro-life and not a radical ant-abortionist.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 11 months ago

Strange how this story isn't getting much attention... wonder why...

Strange, but these polls would appear to disagree somewhat with the values expressed by the fine folks of Larryville. Or the policies of our current secretary of Health & Human Services, who consistently vetoed any proposed restrictions to abortion, no matter how minor, while governor of our fair state. Guess they really don't speak for the country after all.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.