Comments on: Gallup first: more Americans now “pro-life” than “pro-choice” Religion, faith and ethics Sat, 23 Apr 2016 23:25:07 +0000 hourly 1 By: Mark Pauline Fri, 05 Jun 2009 19:38:21 +0000 I actually do see some truth in what pro – life activists think. For example, it WOULD be our duty to oppose the law if we lived in nazi Germany, to try to prevent a holocaust. But I see one huge and insurmountable difference between nazi Germany and the current state of abortion rights. That is that, right now, the mother decides. The pregnant woman makes the terrible, sad, and personal decision. If the state forced her to have a baby that she could not care for, did not want, or that would kill her in delivery, that would be the real nazi analog.

Though fetuses are living humans, there are worse things that can happen to a person than never being born. And all of those things happen to children born to underage, underprivileged, and troubled parents. If a baby gets born but is never loved, that is a worse outcome to me. I recently read that people who experience any detrimental childhood circumstances are 5 times more likely to die from suicide. If the mothers have children when and only when they can take care of them, there will be more lives worth living.

By: brian lee Thu, 21 May 2009 06:03:00 +0000 i read some stats that suggested that abortion rates in democratic leaning families is considerably higher than in their conservative fact the suggestion was that if abortions had not been made legally more available,the prospect of a republican elected government would have been extremely remote.keeping this in mind it is also suggested that by the year 2026 there could be estimated about 50,000,000 muslims here in america,this voter group will not advocate the extermination of children.

By: Daniel Rosaupan Wed, 20 May 2009 04:57:05 +0000 Americans pioneered for the protection of the rights of the animals. Ironically, America today is leading to promote abortion leaving the rights of the unborn trampled and unprotected. They think that the little body inside the womb is nothing.

But now this is a good sign that the survey showed majority of the Americans are now anti abortion. No one has the right to kill a human being on whatever stage the latter might be. More human beings are being killed than pigs everyday with the promotion of abortion. This should not be countenanced.

By: Chris Tue, 19 May 2009 16:55:13 +0000 CORRECTION:

For those who would use the “gun” argument in an attempt to discredit conservatives…

The CDC released numbers on gun deaths for 2005 which yielded approximately 30,694 deaths. My former 17,000 tally only included suicides.

The abortion totals from the CDC for 2004 (~982,000) would require that annual gun death year for over -32- consecutive years just to tie a SINGLE year of abortions.

Red Herring. Red Herring. Red Herring.

By: jeremy Tue, 19 May 2009 11:29:30 +0000 I belive 2 things.

1.abortion,like drugs, is an issue that should addressed with harm reduction and prevention, Obama said it well at Notre dame, lets decrease the need for abortion, make adoption and contraception more available. prohibition only creates crime and criminals and breeds fear.

2. babies are cute, its all well and good to save them before they are walking talking humans, but walking talking children don’t have proper schooling, and in other countries our bombs tend to hit them more often than they should be, those who have already been born are suffering greatly, and all too often the conservative mindset that leads to “pro-life” is also responsible for “pro-business” which keeps under its blanket child labor and the exploitation of poorer countries in general, and the sentiment that we should be dropping bombs in certain places more often, which tend to not care who they blow up, no matter how “smart”.
it is doublethink, plain and simple,
and the idea of banning abortion all together is madness and a testament to the limited understanding of its implications and the obtuse moral misdirection of ill-informed Americans.

By: DAVID Tue, 19 May 2009 08:15:37 +0000 In reply to JR;

a question is
you were asked to die to be born
would you choose to leave
peace,love,joy and contentment
to die is to be born to
pain,grief,sorrow and despair
could you choose
as tears are to joy and sorrow

By: borisjimbo Tue, 19 May 2009 04:22:05 +0000 In a statistical sample, 1000 is a perfectly valid number to survey. Getting more data points only lowers that margin of error; if everyone in the country were asked, the margin of error would be zero. That being said, I’d suggest that something that may have changed is what people consider to be pro-life vs. pro-choice. In a more detailed study it may have been found that people no longer considered the two mutually exclusive and have in fact moved toward the middle ground where the ideal solution would be to minimize the need for abortion by promoting contraception first, then adoption, with abortion only as a last resort, in other words that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. I’d also like to throw out an additional question I think the anti-abortion absolutists may want to address. If they contend life begins at conception and conception begins before implantation of the fertilized egg on the wall of the uterus, doesn’t that mean they should also be against any type of IUD since they work by preventing that implantation? That would be the logical conclusion from their stated position, but I’ve never heard them say anything about IUDs being aborcifactants and thus abhorrent to their beliefs on the matter. If they’re really that absolutist in their position, let them say so so that all women who use IUDs as their form of birth control will know just where they stand in the pro-lifers range of moral certitude.

By: getplaning Tue, 19 May 2009 00:00:39 +0000 Here’s what happens when the religious right mandates its will on the rest of us. From Reuters, no less.

MANAGUA, Oct 2 (Reuters) An outright ban on abortion in Nicaragua has caused the deaths of at least 80 women since it was imposed 11 months ago.
Women with risky pregnancies whose lives might be saved by aborting the fetus are dying because of the ban on terminations in any circumstance.

A week before Nicaragua’s Nov. 5, 2006, election, lawmakers extended a ban on abortions to include rape victims and women who risk dying in childbirth, angering women’s rights activists and medical groups.

Under the law, pushed by the previous conservative government and Nicaragua’s powerful Roman Catholic Church, women who abort or doctors who help them risk three years or more in prison.

Aside from the blow to women who become pregnant after rape or incest, the law is viewed as risking the lives of the some 400 women who suffer dangerous ectopic pregnancies in Nicaragua each year.

The law’s timing was seen as central to its success, as left-wing lawmakers reluctantly supported it to help Sandinista leader Daniel Ortega get the Church’s backing to sweep back to power.

When Ortega was first in power, after his 1979 revolution, his government reaffirmed the right to terminate pregnancies resulting from rape, incest or if a woman’s life was at risk.

This is what the religious right wants for America.

By: Papa Jones Mon, 18 May 2009 17:42:48 +0000 Is the use of Birth Control an appropriate suggestion here?

By: Pete Cann Sun, 17 May 2009 23:44:46 +0000 To JR:

Thanks for a well-expressed criticism. (But I never meant to say that thoughts and feelings induced in one person affected the appropriateness of another living.)

I support euthanasia when appropriate, and I think euthanasia deserves much more consideration when a child is born into pointless suffering, or with no thinking or feeling ability at all. I’m very unusual in this, I think. So you accuse me of nothing that shames me there.

“Sacred” is a hot-button word that means many, conflicting things to many people. I don’t require the word, but if we keep it in common usage I would suggest that it be defined to mean feelings, and promoting the quest to abolish suffering.