Ryusei the Morning Star Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2017/01/23/marist-abortion-poll-n2275329 A new national survey conducted by Marist College's pollster -- which regularly partners with NBC News and the Wall Street Journal -- finds that heavy majorities of Americans believe abortion is morally wrong, and favor an array of mainstream restrictions on the practice. Abortion supporters habitually seek to cast pro-life sentiment as "extreme" and limited to a loud, anti-women minority of voters, but the data betrays that framing as cynical and wishful partisan spin. In reality, many pro-life positions aren't merely solidly mainstream, but actually widely-supported, including among majorities of American women. Based on Townhall's look at the poll's crosstabs, here are a few of the survey's findings: (1) A commanding 83 percent of American adults oppose US tax dollars being spent to facilitate abortions overseas, representing a strong endorsement of President Trump's laudable re-institution of the so-called Mexico City policy. A supermajority (61 percent) oppose tax dollars financing abortions in the US, with just 35 percent in support. This includes 61 percent of women. (2) A slim majority of Americans identify as "pro choice" on the abortion question, but a 52 percent majority is at least in favor of limiting legal abortion to very rare cases such as rape, incest, and to save the life of the mother, which covers the pro-life spectrum (these answers were selected by 52 percent of women). An additional 22 percent say abortion should be illegal after the first trimester of pregnancy, leaving only about one-fourth of respondents to embrace the Democrats' radically permissive stance on the issue. Among those backing significant restrictions on abortion are nearly 80 percent of African Americans and Latinos. (3) On the moral question, roughly six in ten Americans say abortion is morally wrong, compared to less than 40 percent who say it's morally acceptable. A majority believes the practice ultimately does "more harm than good" for women, while less than one-third say it "improves a woman's life." There was no gender gap on either question. (4) A lopsided 78 percent of American adults conclude that laws can protect both pregnant mothers and their unborn children, a recognition of the humanity of both parties. By a 24-point margin, respondents support barring abortions after 20 weeks (in the sixth month and beyond), and a similar majority says that medical professionals who oppose abortion should not be forced to provide those services. The poll's internals show that women are just as likely to hold these views as men. oh look, I'm not crazy out of the mainstream http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/americans-support-supreme-court-ruling-to-restrict-abortion-oppose-taxpayer-funding-300394731.html Among Americans overall, nearly three-quarters (74 percent) want abortion restricted to, at most, the first trimester. Among those who want restrictions, 74 percent want the Supreme Court to rule in favor of those restrictions. This equates to about 55 percent of Americans who support such action by the court. Good funking game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~NOiSE~ Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 Good news to me, always hated the idea of abortion. Dunno how anyone could stomach having it done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted January 23, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 Good news to me, always hated the idea of abortion. Dunno how anyone could stomach having it done. Mother's Life and Child's health should be allowed Rape should too, but w/ rape, it's not like you're gonna not know. So 1st TM should be more than enough to get it. https://apnews.com/de7eeb5f0f334fb8b94a325c38b312dc/Marking-Roe-anniversary,-abortion-foes-pin-hopes-on-Trump Newly released data shows that the number of abortions in the U.S. fell to about 926,000 in 2014, the lowest level since 1974 — the year after the Roe v. Wade ruling. Reasons for the drop include the surge of abortion restrictions and the increased availability of effective contraceptives. There is a middleground guys Make it rare. Make it uneeded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 0 tolerance. Heads up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerion Brightflame Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 Okay, if that's what the American people want. I will disagree with it, and I will always advocate for the choice existing, but if the people want differently so be it. You did leave out the part of the article where it said 'clear majorites are opposed to the idea of the Supreme Court 'completely overturning' Roe vs Wade', but hey. It turns out the American peoples view in this sample oppose the pro-choice viewpoint they oppose it. Whilst Dad has said Zero Tolerance I feel obligied to say this because of 'Good funking Game'; This does not invalidate the pro-choice viewpoint, or the pro-choice line of arguments for the sake of discussion. Because the logical points behind the viewpoint are applicable with or without public support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resident Fascist Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 What percentage of these Americans are Women?What percentage of those Women have ever been pregnant? I said it before, most expecting mothers actually want to give birth to their baby. If not, at the end of the day, the parents are adults. A child born is not a child cared for, and while adoption is an option, a woman should have the right to everything that happens inside her body. Period. If an adult woman wants to have an abortion, it's her baby and it's her choice. I think you'll find if safe abortions were available for all women after several counselling sessions, regardless of how far or not she may be in her pregnancy, and there was no social stigma for having an abortion, there would be far less abortions performed. If adoption is made easy, the amount of women who would likely be willing to give birth to a baby to adopt would increase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted January 23, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 Okay, if that's what the American people want. I will disagree with it, and I will always advocate for the choice existing, but if the people want differently so be it. You did leave out the part of the article where it said 'clear majorites are opposed to the idea of the Supreme Court 'completely overturning' Roe vs Wade', but hey. It turns out the American peoples view in this sample oppose the pro-choice viewpoint they oppose it. Whilst Dad has said Zero Tolerance I feel obligied to say this because of 'Good funking Game'; This does not invalidate the pro-choice viewpoint, or the pro-choice line of arguments for the sake of discussion. Because the logical points behind the viewpoint are applicable with or without public support.A slim majority of Americans identify as "pro choice" on the abortion question Assumed this would cover it yes? It goes back to the view that people like me have of a 8 week ban +3 exception. I consider that pro-life. Some may consider it pro-choice (clearly) and consider it something covered under roe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draconus297 Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 Honestly, this surprises me. However, it's not like I can say it's an incompatible viewpoint. Limitations on how late you can have one, hey go right ahead. Not really my business to comment on the morality of decisions. As long as the option exists, I have nothing to complain about. I'd say a solid fifteen weeks would suffice just in case there are issues with panicking teenagers or asshat deadbeat dads, but really, it's not my issue. Majority rule, minority rights and whatnot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delibirb Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 Majority doesn't equate to logic, and it doesn't make the majority correct. Any psychologist and indeed, surveyor, knows this well. If the majority are in favor of heavy, arbitrary, and as I've said before, irrelevant restrictions with regards to abortion, that is how it will be, until either the majority can see that their decision will cause problems in areas they refuse to pay attention to, or the parties in power with a sense of logic and purpose recognize these problems and valiantly do something about it at the possible cost of their political career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted January 23, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 I personally support up to 8 weeks, which is when the heartbeat starts. That's 2 months, if you miss a period or get raped, don't you think you would know by then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delibirb Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 I personally support up to 8 weeks, which is when the heartbeat starts. That's 2 months, if you miss a period or get raped, don't you think you would know by then?Well sure, you'd generally know around that time unless you understand nothing about your own biology, which isn't really grounds to get an abortion but doesn't mean you should be responsible for a baby. But I digress, the problem is that sometimes it isn't a matter of not wanting to keep the child. In fact, I'd argue it rarely is. Mothers, and fathers, are chemically inclined to love and protect their child. When you hear stories of mothers drowning their infants in the toilet, it's because there's a chemical imbalance and they weren't made to love their child but to hate it, enough to kill it anyway. It's the abortions that are brought on by not wanting to keep the baby we hear about because it's the hardest for voters - often people with children - to understand. But in any case, a mother considering abortion is never truly 100% certain that that's the correct choice, because she is chemically incentivized to keep it, and keep it safe. Thus, abortions have a lot of thought put into them, and that uncertainty continues until well after, too. But, I've gone on a tangent. The problem is that when abortions aren't about not wanting the baby, they're about the parent's recognizing they won't be able to with any confidence, generally as a result of financial struggles. They either don't have the space to keep it comfortable, the money to feed it, or the time to take care of it while they're at work paying for the first two. No one wants their kid to grow up in an awful environment and struggle in a world that refuses to help them. And putting the baby up for adoption isn't a solution because as I said, they're chemically inclined to want to love the child, and that will only grow stronger once it's born. That's why the biological parents are able to pull out of adoptions at any time. And they subconsciously understand that. But, they may not realize they won't be able to afford to keep the baby until, or situations may change after, the first 8 weeks or so. Thus, the opportunity for them to abort the baby if they feel their situation will detriment the happiness of their child and themselves later into the pregnancy must be available. Having said that, I have three clarifications of my position. Firstly, third trimester, and even late second trimester, abortions are still ghastly, and should be avoided whenever possible, preferably always. Second, I still disagree with the idea of abortion on a moral level. But I understand that my morality is not mine to force upon other people, and I understand that people who go through with abortions still have morals, and in fact go under much moral strain in doing so. Third and finally, I am still of the opinion that the government really shouldn't care about whether abortions are occurring or when. It's irrelevant to them, their responsibility as a government, and their ability to govern, not to mention that more effort would go into handling illegal abortion cases than would go into allowing abortions to occur, and employing a hands-off approach to their practice; no tax dollars funding abortion specifically, but none preventing or punishing it either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahrheit Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 Winter, learn to paste as plain text. Ctrl+Shift+V. Anyway, one poll doesn't dictate the national truth, and opinion sways on this pretty frequently, especially across samples. Would also need access to the methodology to account for sampling bias, questioning bias, etc. Regardless of the stability of the poll, it's definitely not "good game," or it would have been "good game" for conservatives ages ago. I don't know why you're so allergic to nuance, but if your analysis ends at "lol I'm obviously right funk you," you probably aren't getting it right, and you're certainly not persuasive. Abortion, like many topics, is a complicated issue with lots of personal emotional investment, and deserves appropriately nuanced discussion. Get out of here with your hot takes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted January 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2017 Winter, learn to paste as plain text. Ctrl+Shift+V. Anyway, one poll doesn't dictate the national truth, and opinion sways on this pretty frequently, especially across samples. Would also need access to the methodology to account for sampling bias, questioning bias, etc. Regardless of the stability of the poll, it's definitely not "good game," or it would have been "good game" for conservatives ages ago. I don't know why you're so allergic to nuance, but if your analysis ends at "lol I'm obviously right funk you," you probably aren't getting it right, and you're certainly not persuasive. Abortion, like many topics, is a complicated issue with lots of personal emotional investment, and deserves appropriately nuanced discussion. Get out of here with your hot takes.52% doesn't make me obviously right, but for someone critiquing me for "lol I'm obviously right funk you" what's up with "Get out of here with your hot takes" There's plenty of nuance in the OP about exactly what people support and don't and what's in the MOE and not. Perhaps you should look at that instead of finding ways to be hypocritical about me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahrheit Posted January 24, 2017 Report Share Posted January 24, 2017 52% doesn't make me obviously right, but for someone critiquing me for "lol I'm obviously right funk you" what's up with "Get out of here with your hot takes" There's plenty of nuance in the OP about exactly what people support and don't and what's in the MOE and not. Perhaps you should look at that instead of finding ways to be hypocritical about me?I'm critiquing your quickness to make sweeping statements. This is a basically wholly true criticism of you and one that has been made by others earlier and more frequently than by me. I don't know why you haven't noticed until now. That's not nuance, it's just repeating what the poll says. Nuance is appreciating that single polls don't tell the whole story, that phrasing matters, and that polls probably aren't the best way to have hard conversations about hard topics. That's a stance I hold for issues where I'm in the majority and the minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted January 24, 2017 Report Share Posted January 24, 2017 You sure? These statistics don't seem accurate. Either way, there's definitely a lot more pro-life people than the media would have you believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahrheit Posted January 24, 2017 Report Share Posted January 24, 2017 Context: http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspxMore: http://www.gallup.com/poll/191834/americans-attitudes-toward-abortion-unchanged.aspx?g_source=ABORTION&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted January 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2017 Context: http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspxThose numbers don't disagree though? Only legal in some cases + never legal is about what this poll came up with the w/ exceptions number. Now it's quite possible that both polls are wrong, a 47/46 split is just as much in the margin of error as as 52 nay result The sweeping argument I made was more in the context of the widely accepted views (beyond 2 polls) such as 2/3 trimester, and gov funding. Even at which point you can argue that majority rule =/= fact Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahrheit Posted January 24, 2017 Report Share Posted January 24, 2017 Those numbers don't disagree though? Only legal in some cases + never legal is about what this poll came up with the w/ exceptions number. Now it's quite possible that both polls are wrong, a 47/46 split is just as much in the margin of error as as 52 nay result The sweeping argument I made was more in the context of the widely accepted views (beyond 2 polls) such as 2/3 trimester, and gov funding. Even at which point you can argue that majority rule =/= fact Those percentages are "of people who said under certain circumstances." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted January 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2017 Those percentages are "of people who said under certain circumstances."Correct, from the WSJ poll: Among Americans overall, nearly three-quarters (74 percent) want abortion restricted to, at most, the first trimester. Among those who want restrictions, 74 percent want the Supreme Court to rule in favor of those restrictions. This equates to about 55 percent of Americans who support such action by the court. compared to Gallup poll ~50% wants legal under certain circumstances "Certain Circumstances" and "with restrictions" are likely similar people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted January 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2017 Planned Parenthood phone call reveals DOES NOT help women who want to keep their babies https://www.facebook.com/liveaction/videos/10154911641473728/ Could be one person acting rouge, but even then it's hardly in sync with their message Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted January 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2017 http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/24/politics/house-approves-bill-barring-taxpayer-money-for-abortions/index.html (CNN)The House of Representatives passed legislation Tuesday barring the use of any taxpayer money for abortions, days before a large contingent of anti-abortion activists are scheduled to attend the annual "March for Life" in Washington. The measure passed mostly along party lines, 238-183. Currently, the so-called "Hyde Amendment," which is regularly attached to annual funding bills, already prohibits federal agencies from using funds for abortion services. The measure approved on Tuesday would make that amendment permanent. The amendment includes an exception for those abortions that are undertaken to protect the life of the mother or done in cases of rape or incest. U.S. House voted 238-183 for bill that would block federal funding for abortion. R 235-0, D 3-183 The 3 Democrats who voted yes:Henry Cuellar #tx28Dan Lipinski #il03Collin Peterson #mn07Same 3 Ds who voted for a similar bill in 2015 House in Jan 2015 passed similar bill 242-179 (R 239-1, D 3-178). Richard Hanna #ny22, lone R no, retired; successor Claudia Tenney voted Y. President Trump has implied he will sign, unlike President Obama. Compare D-R split today to when House first OKed Hyde amendment 207-167 in June 1976: D 113-133, R 94-34 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resident Fascist Posted January 24, 2017 Report Share Posted January 24, 2017 Nice to see guns have more rights than Women do to their own bodies in a 1st world country. funking disgusting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted January 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2017 Nice to see guns have more rights than Women do to their own bodies in a 1st world country. funking disgusting.I was unaware that women weren't allowed into schools or federal building Thank you for informing me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad Posted January 24, 2017 Report Share Posted January 24, 2017 This could have gone in the abortion thread. I'm merging it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halubaris Maphotika Posted January 24, 2017 Report Share Posted January 24, 2017 Nice to see guns have more rights than Women do to their own bodies in a 1st world country. funking disgusting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.