More Americans “Pro-Life” Than “Pro-Choice” for First Time

**busyLivin** · 05-19-2009, 09:05 PM

PRINCETON, NJ -- A new Gallup Poll, conducted May 7-10, finds 51% of Americans calling themselves "pro-life" on the issue of abortion and 42% "pro-choice." This is the first time a majority of U.S. adults have identified themselves as pro-life since Gallup began asking this question in 1995.

The new results, obtained from Gallup's annual Values and Beliefs survey, represent a significant shift from a year ago, when 50% were pro-choice and 44% pro-life. Prior to now, the highest percentage identifying as pro-life was 46%, in both August 2001 and May 2002.

The May 2009 survey documents comparable changes in public views about the legality of abortion. In answer to a question providing three options for the extent to which abortion should be legal, about as many Americans now say the procedure should be illegal in all circumstances (23%) as say it should be legal under any circumstances (22%). This contrasts with the last four years, when Gallup found a strong tilt of public attitudes in favor of unrestricted abortion.

Gallup also found public preferences for the extreme views on abortion about even -- as they are today -- in 2005 and 2002, as well as during much of the first decade of polling on this question from 1975 to 1985. Still, the dominant position on this question remains the middle option, as it has continuously since 1975: 53% currently say abortion should be legal only under certain circumstances.

When the views of this middle group are probed further -- asking these respondents whether they believe abortion should be legal in most or only a few circumstances -- Gallup finds the following breakdown in opinion.

Americans' recent shift toward the pro-life position is confirmed in two other surveys. The same three abortion questions asked on the Gallup Values and Beliefs survey were included in Gallup Poll Daily tracking from May 12-13, with nearly identical results, including a 50% to 43% pro-life versus pro-choice split on the self-identification question.

Additionally, a recent national survey by the Pew Research Center recorded an eight percentage-point decline since last August in those saying abortion should be legal in all or most cases, from 54% to 46%. The percentage saying abortion should be legal in only a few or no cases increased from 41% to 44% over the same period. As a result, support for the two broad positions is now about even, sharply different from most polling on this question since 1995, when the majority has typically favored legality.

Republicans Move to the Right

The source of the shift in abortion views is clear in the Gallup Values and Beliefs survey. The percentage of Republicans (including independents who lean Republican) calling themselves "pro-life" rose by 10 points over the past year, from 60% to 70%, while there has been essentially no change in the views of Democrats and Democratic leaners.

Similarly, by ideology, all of the increase in pro-life sentiment is seen among self-identified conservatives and moderates; the abortion views of political liberals have not changed.

"Pro-Life" Up Among Catholics and Protestants

One of the more prominent news stories touching on the abortion issue in recent months involves President Barack Obama's commencement speech and the bestowal of an honorary doctorate degree on him at the University of Notre Dame -- a Roman Catholic institution -- on Sunday. The invitation has drawn criticism from conservative Catholics and the church hierarchy because of Obama's policies in favor of legalizing and funding abortion, and the controversy might have been expected to strengthen the pro-life leanings of rank-and-file Catholics.

Nevertheless, the swelling of the pro-life position since last year is seen across Christian religious affiliations, including an eight-point gain among Protestants and a seven-point gain among Catholics.

Gender Agreement

A year ago, Gallup found more women calling themselves pro-choice than pro-life, by 50% to 43%, while men were more closely divided: 49% pro-choice, 46% pro-life. Now, because of heightened pro-life sentiment among both groups, women as well as men are more likely to be pro-life.

Men and women have been evenly divided on the issue in previous years; however, this is the first time in nine years of Gallup Values surveys that significantly more men and women are pro-life than pro-choice.

Bottom Line

With the first pro-choice president in eight years already making changes to the nation's policies on funding abortion overseas, expressing his support for the Freedom of Choice Act, and moving toward rescinding federal job protections for medical workers who refuse to participate in abortion procedures, Americans -- and, in particular, Republicans -- seem to be taking a step back from the pro-choice position. However, the retreat is evident among political moderates as well as conservatives.

It is possible that, through his abortion policies, Obama has pushed the public's understanding of what it means to be "pro-choice" slightly to the left, politically. While Democrats may support that, as they generally support everything Obama is doing as president, it may be driving others in the opposite direction.

More Americans â€œPro-Lifeâ€ Than â€œPro-Choiceâ€ for First Time

**bio-chem** · 05-19-2009, 09:47 PM

I think it is a bit too early to be making conclusions about what is happening here or what is causing this, but i do believe it is a jump in the right direction

**bandaidwoman** · 05-20-2009, 11:44 AM

From a pure public health standpoint any country that does not allow abortion is plaqued with an epidemic of deaths from illegal abortions. From a public health perpective, it is vital to allow legal abortions. So as a physician and public health advocate, this kind of thinking is dangerous.

As far as I am concerned, abortion is no different than sending innocent young men and women to die to protect our civil and social liberties that have evolved with a society of independant and sovereign nations. In fact, if these prolifers want to be consistent, they need to be antiwar. The only religious group I know consistent with both are the Jane Indians. Back to the war aspect.....Women no longer choose to be victims of the tyranny of their own biology. This is a natural evolution of the rights of half of our society. And a society that does not allow this choice take a good hard look at the condition of half the population. Societies where women are enslaved by their uterus ,their legal and educational stauts is subpar. Societies that define women by their reproduction does not allow them to support themsevles or educate themselves, and women and llittle girls are secondary citizens. When burdened with a family to feed and a husband that dies, these women starve or prostitute themselves and their daughters. From an anthropolgical and sociological perspective, this simple act allows half the population to be free and determine her destiny in her society.

In other words, abortion is a natural part of social evolution. If this country wants to regress, so be it, but I am glad Obama is not a regressionist in this aspect.

As a Trekie I quote from Spock in The Wrath of Khan " The good of the many outweigh the good of the few." The few are the aborted fetuses, the many is the unshackelling and freedom of half the population of any society so that they can be free to use their "brains" and not their uteruses. In these societies, women who decide to give birth to their daughters know that their daughters standing in society is good and solid, and not degraded into reproductive chattles for men. The quality of life for these daughters are now more assured ( not gauranteed of course)

**busyLivin** · 05-20-2009, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by bandaidwoman

From a pure public health standpoint any country that does not allow abortion is plaqued with an epidemic of deaths from illegal abortions. From a public health perpective, it is vital to allow legal abortions. So as a physician and public health advocate, this kind of thinking is dangerous.

As far as I am concerned, abortion is no different than sending innocent young men and women to die to protect our civil and social liberties that have evolved with a society of independant and sovereign nations. In fact, if these prolifers want to be consistent, they need to be antiwar. The only religious group I know consistent with both are the Jane Indians. Back to the war aspect.....Women no longer choose to be victims of the tyranny of their own biology. This is a natural evolution of the rights of half of our society. And a society that does not allow this choice take a good hard look at the condition of half the population. Societies where women are enslaved by their uterus ,their legal and educational stauts is subpar. Societies that define women by their reproduction does not allow them to support themsevles or educate themselves, and women and llittle girls are secondary citizens. When burdened with a family to feed and a husband that dies, these women starve or prostitute themselves and their daughters. From an anthropolgical and sociological perspective, this simple act allows half the population to be free and determine her destiny in her society.

In other words, abortion is a natural part of social evolution. If this country wants to regress, so be it, but I am glad Obama is not a regressionist in this aspect.

As a Trekie I quote from Spock in The Wrath of Khan " The good of the many outweigh the good of the few." The few are the aborted fetuses, the many is the unshackelling and freedom of half the population of any society so that they can be free to use their "brains" and not their uteruses. In these societies, women who decide to give birth to their daughters know that their daughters standing in society is good and solid, and not degraded into reproductive chattles for men. The quality of life for these daughters are now more assured ( not gauranteed of course)

Most people in the survey think it should be legal.. they are just saying they are personally pro-life.

**IronAddict** · 05-20-2009, 11:57 AM

What happened to Liberty and the pursuit of happiness ?

**min0 lee** · 05-20-2009, 12:01 PM

Originally Posted by bandaidwoman

From a pure public health standpoint any country that does not allow abortion is plaqued with an epidemic of deaths from illegal abortions. From a public health perpective, it is vital to allow legal abortions. So as a physician and public health advocate, this kind of thinking is dangerous.

As far as I am concerned, abortion is no different than sending innocent young men and women to die to protect our civil and social liberties that have evolved with a society of independant and sovereign nations. In fact, if these prolifers want to be consistent, they need to be antiwar. The only religious group I know consistent with both are the Jane Indians. Back to the war aspect.....Women no longer choose to be victims of the tyranny of their own biology. This is a natural evolution of the rights of half of our society. And a society that does not allow this choice take a good hard look at the condition of half the population. Societies where women are enslaved by their uterus ,their legal and educational stauts is subpar. Societies that define women by their reproduction does not allow them to support themsevles or educate themselves, and women and llittle girls are secondary citizens. When burdened with a family to feed and a husband that dies, these women starve or prostitute themselves and their daughters. From an anthropolgical and sociological perspective, this simple act allows half the population to be free and determine her destiny in her society.

In other words, abortion is a natural part of social evolution. If this country wants to regress, so be it, but I am glad Obama is not a regressionist in this aspect.

As a Trekie I quote from Spock in The Wrath of Khan " The good of the many outweigh the good of the few." The few are the aborted fetuses, the many is the unshackelling and freedom of half the population of any society so that they can be free to use their "brains" and not their uteruses. In these societies, women who decide to give birth to their daughters know that their daughters standing in society is good and solid, and not degraded into reproductive chattles for men. The quality of life for these daughters are now more assured ( not gauranteed of course)

**busyLivin** · 05-20-2009, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by IronAddict

What happened to Liberty and the pursuit of happiness ?

You forgot life.

Man, talk about a softball... c'mon, you planned that, right?

**IronAddict** · 05-20-2009, 12:09 PM

Originally Posted by busyLivin

You forgot life.

Man, talk about a softball... c'mon, you planned that, right?

Of coarse. What's the name of this threads title. Dude, Appearantly you don't get satire either!

**busyLivin** · 05-20-2009, 12:10 PM

Originally Posted by bandaidwoman

From a pure public health standpoint any country that does not allow abortion is plaqued with an epidemic of deaths from illegal abortions.

I never understood that argument. I always saw the baby as the victim.

I don't want anyone to die, but I feel much worse for the baby than for the irresponsible mother who doesn't want to deal with it.

(Don't throw the rape/incest argument.. they make up less than 1% of abortions).

**shiznit2169** · 05-20-2009, 12:13 PM

In my opinion, the only time a woman should be allowed to have an abortion is if she was raped or has legal complications that could put her life in jeopardy (i.e. death) if she has the baby.

Any other excuses such as unplanned pregnancies or stupidity does not justify your actions and therefore you need to have the baby.

**min0 lee** · 05-20-2009, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by busyLivin

(Don't throw the rape/incest argument.. they make up less than 1% of abortions).

Would you agree to abortion in those two cases?

**tucker01** · 05-20-2009, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by busyLivin

I never understood that argument. I always saw the baby as the victim.

I don't want anyone to die, but I feel much worse for the baby than for the irresponsible mother who doesn't want to deal with it.

(Don't throw the rape/incest argument.. they make up less than 1% of abortions).

Originally Posted by shiznit2169

In my opinion, the only time a woman should be allowed to have an abortion is if she was raped or has legal complications that could put her life in jeopardy (i.e. death) if she has the baby.

Any other excuses such as unplanned pregnancies or stupidity does not justify your actions and therefore you need to have the baby.

That is all fine and dandy to say that. But do you know the cost of child, let alone the time invested as being a parent?

I would rather not bring a child into this world where a parent won't give to damns about them.

**busyLivin** · 05-20-2009, 12:22 PM

Originally Posted by min0 lee

Would you agree to abortion in those two cases?

I really don't know. I personally like to think if it was me, I''d give it up for adoption. I think those situations obviously deserve more consideration... but in the end, it's still an innocent life. Tough one...

**busyLivin** · 05-20-2009, 12:22 PM

Originally Posted by IainDaniel

That is all fine and dandy to say that. But do you know the cost of child, let alone the time invested as being a parent?

I would rather not bring a child into this world where a parent won't give to damns about them.

Adoption?

**shiznit2169** · 05-20-2009, 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by IainDaniel

That is all fine and dandy to say that. But do you know the cost of child, let alone the time invested as being a parent?

I would rather not bring a child into this world where a parent won't give to damns about them.

That's what adoption is for. There are plenty of parents out there who can't have kids due to medical reasons so they adopt instead.

**IronAddict** · 05-20-2009, 12:27 PM

Some might call that a choice.

**tucker01** · 05-20-2009, 12:28 PM

Look at how many kids are in the adoption process right now, with Abortion legal. Let alone the cost to shelter these children and provide psychological care.

**busyLivin** · 05-20-2009, 12:30 PM

Originally Posted by IainDaniel

Look at how many kids are in the adoption process right now, with Abortion legal. Let alone the cost to shelter these children and provide psychological care.

So they'd rather be dead?

**min0 lee** · 05-20-2009, 12:30 PM

Originally Posted by busyLivin

Adoption?

Sadly but it's a business now, a lot of people are in it for the money.

**tucker01** · 05-20-2009, 12:32 PM

Originally Posted by busyLivin

So they'd rather be dead?

And that is the slipperly slope of when a fetus is considered a living being.

But given the odds of how I would have to live my life given I was aborted or not, I would lean towards being aborted, knowing what a shithole this world can be.

**busyLivin** · 05-20-2009, 12:33 PM

Originally Posted by IainDaniel

But given the odds of how I would have to live my life given I was aborted or not, I would lean towards being aborted, knowing what a shithole this world can be.

**min0 lee** · 05-20-2009, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by shiznit2169

That's what adoption is for. There are plenty of parents out there who can't have kids due to medical reasons so they adopt instead.

Adoption is not perfect.
How many people go for the blue eyed kid and ignore the black kid.

Now in Manhattan the designer thing to do is to go to China and adopt a baby doll. It's like a prize doll to them.

**min0 lee** · 05-20-2009, 12:40 PM

**min0 lee** · 05-20-2009, 12:41 PM

I thought this was funny.

**tucker01** · 05-20-2009, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by busyLivin

So? Like I said given the odds. There are exceptions to every situation.

People get convicted wrongly all the time. Should we stop convictions?

**busyLivin** · 05-20-2009, 12:47 PM

Originally Posted by IainDaniel

So? Like I said given the odds. There are exceptions to every situation.

Estimates put the number of abortions since 1973 at 39,290,477. Probably a couple more exceptions that were missed.

**IronAddict** · 05-20-2009, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by min0 lee

I thought this was funny.

it was, very!

Thread: More Americans “Pro-Life” Than “Pro-Choice” for First Time

Thread Tools

Display

More Americans “Pro-Life” Than “Pro-Choice” for First Time

Similar Threads

Understanding Esters, Active-Life and Half-Life

Time to get my life and body back

I'm sorry, but I have no choice.

For the first time in my life

Posting Permissions