Skip to main content

NOW sign that says "Keep Abortion Legal"
How most of America feels
On the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, NBC/WSJ has released a supposedly stunning new poll that actually confirms what most other polling on abortion shows: Americans want reproductive rights to remain legal, thank you very much:
[A] majority of Americans – for the first time – believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

What’s more, seven in 10 respondents oppose Roe v. Wade being overturned, which is the highest percentage on this question since 1989. [...]

According to the poll, 54 percent of adults say that abortion should be legal either always or most of the time, while a combined 44 percent said it should be illegal – either with or without exceptions.

This isn't really news, though. Because every time Americans are polled on the issue of abortion, the numbers always show the same thing: Americans are mightily confused about what Roe is or whether they are "pro-life" or "pro-choice" or under what circumstances they think abortion is wrong, but the one thing they are perfectly clear and consistent about is that they want abortion to remain legal.

Consider, for example, a Gallup poll from May 2011, which found that a mere 41 percent of Americans identify as "pro-choice." The forced-birther movement was quick to crow with glee that they were winning the debate over reproductive rights. The traditional media, of course, was only too happy to push that narrative as well. Women beware, because most Americans don't support your right to make your own reproductive decisions.

Except that's not what the poll really showed. Instead, it demonstrated that calling oneself "pro-life" or "pro-choice" is entirely meaningless when you consider:

Only 20 percent of Americans think abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. Which means the overwhelming majority of Americans believe abortion should be legal in all or some circumstances. Even among the 51 percent who consider abortion "morally wrong," many of those same people still don't think abortion should be completely outlawed.
In other words, regardless of whatever labels Americans use, or whether they think abortion is wrong, or what they think about a Supreme Court case they don't even understand—the vast majority of Americans support keeping abortion legal. Just like the latest poll shows. Just like all the other polls show. Even Americans who think abortion is wrong want it to remain legal. Even Americans who call themselves "pro-life" want it to remain legal. Even those assholes who terrorize women and their doctors outside health clinics, and then get indignant when their knocked-up daughters have to jump through so many absurd loopholes to obtain a legal medical procedure—even they want it to remain legal.

So this latest poll is good news, but it isn't really very different from what all the other polling has always shown: Americans want abortion to be legal. The rest is just semantics.

Originally posted to Kaili Joy Gray on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 11:16 AM PST.

Also republished by Abortion and Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  70% oppose overturning RvW, highest since '89 (15+ / 0-)
    What’s more, seven in 10 respondents oppose Roe v. Wade being overturned, which is the highest percentage on this question since 1989. [...]
    So the Republicans went all-in on the War on Women in both 2011 and 2012, and as a result, Americans are more in favor of legal abortion than ever.

    Please proceed, Republicans.

    •  Thanks, but... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue muon, madhaus, irishwitch

      ... I'd rather see them crushed underfoot like a spider, then picked up with tissues and flushed down the toilet..., after which I can wash the spot on the floor where they were squished with vinegar and get their germs off the floor.

      Yes, sometimes my fantasies tend toward the bizarre.  However, over the topic of abortion, this is a no-holds-barred bare-fist fight, and I want these almighty hypocritical bastages to STFU forever about the topic of abortion which does NOT concern them in the least when it's their own who need an abortion or who need a dead fetus removed from a woman's body so she doesn't die from it like my grandmother did.

      I liked TheOtherMaven's sig line so well I have kept it for reference:

      If it's
      Not your body,
      Then it's
      Not your choice
      And it's
      None of your damn business!
      [Daily Kos: TheOtherMaven sig line 2011/12]

      I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

      by NonnyO on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 01:42:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Slavery (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      madhaus, irishwitch, Dogs are fuzzy

      It doesn't even matter what Americans want.  Slavery is FORBIDDEN by the US Constitution.  No one gets to enslave a woman to bear a child she doesn't want to bear, no matter how many people think it's a good idea!

  •  As we've learned from Republican shenanigans (12+ / 0-)

    and adventures in the world of gerrymandering . . . Republicans don't really give a shit what the MAJORITY wants . . . .

    I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever. ~Thomas Jefferson

    by bobdevo on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 12:48:16 PM PST

    •  You nailed it. (9+ / 0-)

      They could give a damn about what the majority thinks or wants. Going state by state they are accomplishing their goals of restricting access. If not an outright ban, it will be as close as you can get.
      As someone who was around for the fight the first time,
      to have to go through this again (and I believe it is worse now and the battle even tougher), exhausts and frustrates me.

      "The past is never dead. It's not even past". Faulkner.

      by mchestnutjr on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 12:57:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Fortunately, here in Ohio, (6+ / 0-)

        we seem to have an army of motivated young people.

        Jon Husted is a dick.

        by anastasia p on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 01:14:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  The danger they run in (4+ / 0-)

        eliminating abortion is losing a huge wedge that they've exploited since Roe.

        They (meaning the GOP) don't want to eliminate it.  They need it.


        Republicans chap my ass


        by Marc in KS on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 01:23:59 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I have never believed that (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LSophia, Marc in KS, irishwitch

          and their actions of the last two years definitively proved it. They can raise just as much money by showing results — by making it next to impossible for women in many areas to get abortions and promising to expand on that. Hell YES, they want to ban it. Unfortunately, a bit of the unwariness on our side, I believe, is a result of believing this fable that they "need" abortion to be legal as a wedge issue and a fundraiser. They don't. They need "progress."

          Jon Husted is a dick.

          by anastasia p on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 01:42:08 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't agree. (2+ / 0-)

            Look at the change in the GOP electorate since Roe.  Catholics were always a strong democratic bloc.  Now they're almost entirely in the GOP's pocket.  The Christian right (most of whom didn't really care about abortion) has been whipped into a frenzy and strongly motivated by the issue.

            If it goes away, they lose a big part of their arsenal.  Chipping away keeps the masses happy, but outright ban?  Won't happen.


            Republicans chap my ass


            by Marc in KS on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 02:19:16 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Actually, I think Catholics split 50-50 on partie (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Marc in KS

              And as the older generation dies off, I suspect the liberals grow.

              The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

              by irishwitch on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 06:11:57 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  It is getting better. (0+ / 0-)

                Younger Catholics aren't as staunchly doctrinaire as the older generation tends to be.

                But for 40 years now Catholics have not been a big party of the Democratic base.  And the GOP loves that.

                I'd like some time to try and track how the conservative Christians (non-catholics) came to be such virulent anti-abortion people.  They weren't always that way.  It seems to me that the christian right took that as the Catholics more and more moved to the right.

                Be an interesting piece of research...


                Republicans chap my ass


                by Marc in KS on Wed Jan 23, 2013 at 02:13:34 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  Ditto: (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LSophia, blue muon, irishwitch
        As someone who was around for the fight the first time, to have to go through this again (and I believe it is worse now and the battle even tougher), exhausts and frustrates me.
        I'm a senior citizen now, fer cryin' out loud, so long past the time when this law could affect me directly.  This was settled law.  The reichwingnut (usually Xian) Repukes (and a few Blue Dogs) through the decades have made things untenable for young women.  This is ridiculous!!!

        If men get to pass these laws to deny women the right to make decisions about their own bodies and medical decisions thereof, then women should be able to pass laws regulating the male legislator's bodies and require they have vasectomies..., and a woman surgeon should do the surgery under general anesthetic to make sure it's not reversible..., just in case attitudes like theirs are genetic; thus, their seed can not be passed down in future generations to make life miserable for more women.

        I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

        by NonnyO on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 01:52:18 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Some reductio absurdum questions . . . (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          irishwitch, NonnyO, Dogs are fuzzy

          1. If the Congress takes away a woman's right to choose, then is the Congress making itself the woman's (and the resulting child's) guardian and thus financially responsible for their care?

          2. If Congress provides financial support for women who were denied abortion and the subsequent child, is that fair to women who didn't seek an abortion and thus become "wards of the state"?

          3. Does the Congress have the right to declare people incompetent to make medical decisions?

          4. Would the incompetency apply to all decisions? or just all medical decisions? or just certain medical decisions?

          5. Who decides which life decisions are subject to Congressional review?

          This comment is a natural product. The slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects.

          by blue muon on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 04:13:00 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  :-) Send those questions... (0+ / 0-)

            ... to the Repuke legislators who want to take women's rights and decisions of personal autonomy out of the control of women.

            I wonder how fast their heads would explode?

            I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

            by NonnyO on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 07:06:32 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Hey, who's more important - the American public (7+ / 0-)

    Or the tiny percentage of angry extremists who vote Republican politicians into office in highly gerrymandered districts?

    I think we ALL know the answer to that.

    "Teach a man to fish, he can feed himself for a life. Don’t feed fish." - Future President Paul Ryan

    by Fordmandalay on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 12:51:49 PM PST

  •  The Obama campaign knew this. (9+ / 0-)

    Romney did not.

    I saw a continual barrage of Obama campaign ads showing Romney saying in his own words how he would overturn Roe v. Wade and saying, "Planned Parenthood; we're going to get rid of that."

  •  Excellent results-even if not news. (7+ / 0-)

    Liked on FB. Spread the word. We are the majority.

  •  70% of Americans (13+ / 0-)

    believe MYOB is the proper policy -- they might not choose an abortion themselves if they were in that position, but they're not going to but their nose in other people's business.

    If the "pro-birthers" were really about "saving innocent lives", they'd be supporting comprehensive sex education and access to contraception (and don't give me bullcrap about "abortifacients" either). But it's not about the babies -- it's about punishing the women who dare to enjoy sex but who don't necessarily enjoy babies.

    There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

    by Cali Scribe on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 12:56:23 PM PST

  •  It's nobody's business (8+ / 0-)

    what a woman does with her body. Period.

    That, and the forced-pregnancy people need to realize that women don't exactly give cocktail parties to celebrate an abortion. I hear it's not an easy decision regardless of where one stands on the politics.

    Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

    by MBNYC on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 01:01:43 PM PST

    •  I've known several women (5+ / 0-)

      who have had to have them, and it was never an easy decision nor was it easy to endure.


      Republicans chap my ass


      by Marc in KS on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 01:25:41 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I had a chat the other day (5+ / 0-)

        with a good friend, and she made an interesting point: if women who have terminated a pregnancy would make a point of coming out about it, the way LGBTs do and have done, the entire discussion could change.

        Get rid of the shame and stigma, and voila, the politics change.

        Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

        by MBNYC on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 01:33:36 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I agree. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MBNYC, blue muon, irishwitch

          However, one organization, I think it was Planned Parenthood, did a campaign a few years ago with a diverse assortment of ordinary-looking women with the slogan "I had an abortion".  I was not surprised that the antis thought it was in horribly bad taste, suggesting that the women shouldn't be acing like they were proud of themselves, or that they should be celebrating having an abortion.  I was surprised, though, to hear virtually the same criticism coming from many on our side.  We need to work on that.

          The trick is to take the "theoretical woman" out of the abortion discussion and replace her with an actual person. A lot of people will support onerous restrictions on abortion such as waiting periods, parental involvement, procedure bans, elimination of Medicaid funding, etc.  But if you start telling them actual women's stories, and how those restrictions impacted them, they find themselves starting to make exception after exception, and before long, they realize that they don't really support those restrictions after all.  

        •  Darcy Burner has made this point (0+ / 0-)

          There is a high price to pay for being among the first to come out, of course.

    •  My grandmother died because... (9+ / 0-)

      ... the doctor did not abort a fetus he knew died in March at six months' gestation (this was in 1938 under old abortion laws that forbid everything).  He prescribed bed rest and waited for her body to naturally abort it.  Her body didn't.  She finally went into labor at term the end of May, surgery was done to remove the dead fetus, and she died of blood loss and toxemia of pregnancy and parturition effort anyway.  Five children and a confused and bewildered widower survived her, and a whole family is still feeling the effects of her needless death.  At family gatherings one of her sisters almost always loudly and bitterly proclaimed "If she had been a farm animal she would have been treated more humanely!"  The whole family and community knew the fetus was dead after the doctor declared it was in March, you see, so they all knew the dead fetus should have been removed....  To cover his own arse, the doctor even made a death certificate for the "baby boy: of six months' gestation but carried to term; cause of death: toxemia of pregnancy."  [Old term for Pre-eclampsia which is known to kill the fetus.]

      No one will ever be able to tell me that abortion (even if only to remove a dead fetus, so technically possibly not an 'abortion') isn't sometimes necessary to save the life of the mother.

      I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

      by NonnyO on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 02:04:05 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Pre-eclampsia all too often (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        NonnyO, MBNYC

        kills the mother too. My favorite cousin was carrying an anencephalic fetus in the late 60s or early 70s, and the doctors wanted to do a legal therapeutic abortion immediately because she was prone to high blood pressure and pre-eclampsia and she already had 2 kids.  She talked to the priests, and waited till the 7th month by which point they had to do a C section because the fetus also had hydrocephalus.  

        She lived to bear her third child, and she left the church for good.

        The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

        by irishwitch on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 06:16:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Correct.... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          I realize pre-eclampsia could have killed my grandmother much earlier.

          It's the doctor's note on the reverse side of her death certificate that made me think that if the dead fetus had been removed when he knew it had died by March that got me to thinking that after surviving surgery to remove it she could have gone on to live a full life..., and maybe she could have known her grandchildren.  She was only 35 when she died.  To a person, everyone I have ever talked with who knew her have spoken of her in glowing terms as 'the nicest person' they'd ever met.  Usually that kind of statement is followed by the words 'but' or 'except' - but not in any stories about her.  (One of Gram's nieces said she liked my gram better than her own mother, sis of my gram.)  Five children, ages 15 down to age two survived her, and the last one who was age two when she died insisted she died when he was born, but I got tired of arguing with him and told him to call Mom (his eldest sis, my mother who was 13) and confirm what I already knew from my genealogy info.

          The whole family lost out with my gram's death.  Certainly the (negative) ripple effects have come down through three and four generations after her death.

          If her living could have prevented any of that, it would have been much better to surgically abort the dead fetus and let her live.

          I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

          by NonnyO on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 07:20:43 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Where the action is (5+ / 0-)

    In the state legislatures. It's nice to have a poll reaffirm that nationally a clear majority of people want abortion services to remain legal. But GOP-controlled state governments are making it harder and harder to get these services, regardless if they are popular ideas nationally or not. I think GOP strategists figured out they can't win nationally on issue after issue so they have been focusing on the states. Plus most people don't pay very close attention to laws and amendments that get pushed through at the state level.

    •  People in Ohio are paying VERY close attention (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mchestnutjr, irishwitch

      We can hardly not, since abortion seems to have been the #1 issue in the last session of our legislature, although it was hardly mentioned in the campaign of 2010 in which they promised to focus on nothing but creating more jobs faster than the Democrats. They have done nothing at all about that — luckily for them, Obama bailed out the auto industry AND Ohio. All they have done is talk about abortion, abortion, abortion. They even had a fetus "testify" in the statehouse.

      Jon Husted is a dick.

      by anastasia p on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 01:19:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  True (4+ / 0-)

    ". . . get indignant when their knocked-up daughters have to . jump through so many absurd loopholes to obtain a legal medical procedure. . ."

    Anyone who has ever escorted or worked at a clinic can tell you that.  

  •  I know some people who still believe that it (7+ / 0-)

    should be made illegal, which always comes down to a religious argument for them.  They believe that it is murder and that they have a right and an obligation to stop you.

    I think it is a personal choice with personal consequences.  Irrespective of my belief that it should be a choice, the even bigger, number one reason why I think it needs to remain legal is because we sure as hell don't want to go back to coat hangers in alleys which IS EXACTLY the type of thing that would happen.  Growing up I had a neighbor who was an ER nurse during the days when it was illegal and she would talk, always with a shudder, about seeing the girls come in hemorrhaging after getting a back alley abortion.

    Making it illegal, won't make it go away.  It will just drive it underground.

    Those who think it should be illegal admit that they understand and realize this would be the consequence, but still want it that way.  I don't get it.

  •  Majority? (0+ / 0-)

    In general, I must say I am against abortions.  I think there are some circumstances in which it may be acceptable.  My concern is that we have not set a standard.  I would feel better if a standard were set and we stuck to it.  For example, if someone commits a homicide on a pregneant woman why can they be charged with 2 homicides, one for the woman and one for the unborn child?  To me the question of abortion becomes a question of at which point is that living organism to be considered a life.  You can't refuse to call it a life in the case of abortion but then call it a life if it is lost to a violent criminal act.  Pick one.  (I would never do this, but as an example) If I strike a pregneant woman in the stomach and she looses her baby because of it, is that just battery because it wasn't a life inside her?  Or is it that a woman can decide whether it is a life or not based on if she wants the child or not?  My concern is an issue of morality.    

    Regarding discussion of majority, it means very little in these types of cases.  This is because America is not a democracy, it is actually a Federal Constitutional Republic.  Check it out, Article IV s 4 of the constitution.  The importance of the Federal Constitutional part is that we do have a constitution that grant minority rights.  This protects our country from what the framers feared would be a 'corrupt majority'.  Democracy itself never works.  Certainly, part of being a republic does have a democratic aspect to it, but it by no means allows everything to be changed by a simple majority rule.  For example, if for some reason the majority believed that slavery should be reinstated, regardless of if 51% of the people wanted it, the constitution protects the freedom and liberty of all people.  Therefore, the supreme court (Which in my opinion is badly broken) reads the constitution and decides what is protected and what is not.  Again, note that the supreme court does not take into account (Or should not be taking into account, rather) what a majority feels.  Remember, according to Thomas Jefferson (The guy on mount rushmore) "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people can take away the rights of the other 49%"

    Just my two cents and something to perhaps consider

    •  I insist on the right to control my own body. (8+ / 0-)

      I should not have to figure out the details first.

    •  Take your Jeffersonian argument elsewhere, (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NonnyO, howabout, irishwitch


      You nor Thomas Jefferson have a leg to stand on in this argument...unless, of course, you have a uterus (I don't believe Mr. Jefferson did. I could be wrong, but probably not). If indeed you have a utuerus, please feel free to never ever get an abortion.

      I do have a uterus and intend on making decisions about it that I deem proper. You know what I'm going to say next:


    •  Your second paragraph means very little (5+ / 0-)

      Your first paragraph isn't some moral conundrum. The reason you see the push to declare a "double murder" if a pregnant woman is shot is part of the push on the right to establish the "pre-born" as a full "person" with the rights of a born person. As with the limits on abortion, it's another way of making inroads to get where they want to go.

      Jon Husted is a dick.

      by anastasia p on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 01:46:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Here goes. (7+ / 0-)
      To me the question of abortion becomes a question of at which point is that living organism to be considered a life.
      Not to me.

      We can argue about whether a fetus is a living organism till the cows come home, and then we can argue about it with the cows.  We can't ever settle it.

      So let's talk about something we can settle: no living human has the right to use another living human's body without continuing consent, even to save one's own life.

      Nobody has the right to force me to donate my blood, my kidney, my liver lobe, or any other part of me, even if they will die without it.  That includes the use of my uterus and the massive metabolic load that goes with it.

    •  Not something to consider--unless (0+ / 0-)

      these standards are just efor you. They sure don't match MY standards or religious beliefs, so kindly keep them to yourself and off my body.

      The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

      by irishwitch on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 06:19:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Who does my body belong to? (8+ / 0-)

    Me or the government?

    Where's your freedomz when it comes to me?

  •  This is great news for Rumpism. (0+ / 0-)

    "And now we know that government by organized money is just as dangerous as government by organized mob." -- FDR

    by Mogolori on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 01:25:34 PM PST

  •  Commemorate Roe V. Wade (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Find actions here:

    and please pass it along/Thx/Sh

  •  Even with these poll numbers (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    howabout, irishwitch

    it's still amazing how shy the pro-choice side of the argument is.  Where I work you would think that 100% of people there are pro-lifers. Bullying is obviously a big part of the pro-life way.

    •  Sometimes it seems like that is changing (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      6ZONite, howabout, irishwitch

      Everyone around me who is pro-choice seems more emboldened lately, and the pro-lifers I know seem more sheepish lately. Maybe that's just wishful thinking, but it seems that way.  

      •  Agreed. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        6ZONite, irishwitch

        I and the women I know are much more militant than we used to be. We have went from debating and discussing to 'hell no, it's my body, no debate or discussion'.

        Nobody is discussing a man's right to control his body, let alone the most personal private issues, and you are not going to put my sex organs up for debate.

    •  They are NOT "Pro-Lifers" (6+ / 0-)

      They are "Anti-Choice."  Or "Forced Birthers."

      Often misogynists.

      Often in favor of war where people are killed (usually by guns or bombs, and these types fit the stereotype of those who think the 2nd Amendment doesn't have a first clause about militias because they've never read it and have no knowledge of history and circumstances under which it was written).  They usually believe in the death penalty.  They are very Pro-Death..., but refuse to see how that conflicts with their pro-life-of-the-pre-born..., because their entire aim is to force a woman to give birth to every child involves punishing a woman for having sex, and maybe enjoying sex, and they also want to take away the welfare that could help these females raise the babies they have been forced to give birth to, thanks to the laws that make it increasingly difficult to get an abortion, even if it's necessary because a girl who is young enough has a body that is not developed enough to carry a pregnancy to term.  No consideration is given for women or young teenage girls who are raped and may become pregnant from such horror.  Et cetera.

      To reiterate; They are NOT "Pro-Life."  Please call them anything realistically descriptive, because they really don't give a flying fig about the life of the already-living.

      I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

      by NonnyO on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 02:31:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  How hard would it be to replace "pro-life" (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LSophia, NonnyO, bewareofme, irishwitch

    ..with "forced birth" when discussing the issue on MSNBC? I'm looking at you, Nia-Malika Henderson..

    And the rest of you too.

    The Aggressively Ignorant Caucus is getting aggressively ignorant again.

    by Anthony Page aka SecondComing on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 01:44:04 PM PST

  •  Question.... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TechBob, howabout, Dogs are fuzzy

    If some states are totally restricting access to abortion, and it is still a Federal right, couldn't a clinic be opened on Federal land owned in that state, like say, a military base, to offer services for women? The protection of the doctors would also be taken care of...
    Or say, a native reservation? They have their own rules as opposed to a State, don't they? Many of the States that are going full gusn to restrict womens access have both of the above.. or am I missing something here....?

    •  What about clinics leasing space on bases? (5+ / 0-)

      Clinics pay for space and reimburse for security costs (which would ACTUALLY be secure ... no more harassment of patients) and the base gets convenient access to better quality women's health care.  Location might be an issue, but not so much when you're down to "one" or none for an entire state.

      Reimbursement takes "gov funded" off the complaint table (though I'm sure it would still be an issue) and removes liability, security and policing costs from local community. This would also help with clinic worker's personal safety and security - spying on base is all sorts of illegal and easier to track. "On base" also neuters the TRAP laws that unfairly target clinics.

      A "win" all the way round.

      "Curiouser and curiouser!"

      by TechBob on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 02:11:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Don't assume base security is actually that good. (0+ / 0-)

        The Ft. Hood Wiccans had a lovely altar with stones marking the four directions set up on base after jumping through hoops to get permission to use base facilities (in this case,  open land near a picnic area).  And some  nice soul (most likely belonging to a church led by a nasty Baptist preacher)  destroyed the markers and the altar--a 500 pound slab of rock sitting on two other large stones.  And security never noticed, nor did it look very hard for the culprits even though it was pretty obvious who were the likely suspects.  That preacher had been preaching against the witches for 2 years, and his people had come to disturb the rituals, becoming so disruptive that the MPs had to protect the Wiccans from the loving Christians.

        The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

        by irishwitch on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 06:28:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Great idea. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NonnyO, 6ZONite
    •  Actually military women or wives cannot get an (0+ / 0-)

      abortion on base because of the Hyde amendment--no federal funds can be used.  And if the woman is overseas, well, she either  gets an abortion under the local health system or has to get leave to go home to the U.S., scrape up money for her airfare, and for lodging and food, plus the amount ofr the abortion. I saw a lot of young women end up as single mothers in Japan because they tended to get pregnant int he first six months their on their first tour of duty, They flatout couldn't afford to go home, and since time is of the essence, they'd have had to fill out a leave chit explaining why they needed emergency leave so soon after transferring to Japan.

      The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

      by irishwitch on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 06:24:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The question is asked by Republicans, "Why is this (0+ / 0-)

    Social Security not set up as a fully funded annuity system?" opposed to a system partially funded by future recipients and  supplanted by intergenerational we help pay for the benefits going to current retirees.  Well, actually it is an INGENIUS program, because if we fully funded social security from receipients, withholding would probably have to go up 4 times on insureds AND on businesses (Not sure about the exact numbers and invite you to contribute).  No one is going to go for this, especially businesses.  Pay rates would have  to increase proportionally.  Second problem, and it is a huge one, is where the hell are you going to invest all of this cash flow?  The safe investment vehicles just are not there to absorb all this money.  SO, the Republican vision is a complete mirage,  a total hoax, a flim flam, a scam.

    GOP Wars against: Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Immigrants, Mexicans, Blacks, Gays, Women, Unions, Workers, Unemployed, Voters, Elderly, Kids, Poor, Sick, Disabled, Dying, Lovers, Kindness, Rationalism, Science, Sanity, Reality.

    by SGWM on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 02:03:08 PM PST

  •  Mentioned this in a diary this morning (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Read all about it here.

    The real story is that according to the internals, the number of those who strongly support Roe has gone from 51 percent in 2005 to 57 percent now, while those who strongly favor repeal has dropped from 26 percent in 2005 to 21 percent now.

    The NRA's response to calls for responsible gun law reform: noun, verb, Second Amendment

    by Christian Dem in NC on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 02:09:07 PM PST

  •  Here's your anti-abortion movement (5+ / 0-)

    From WCPO (Cincinnati's ABC affiliate):

    John Brockhoeft bristles at the use of the word violence to describe the war he has waged against abortion.

    For Brockhoeft, who went to prison for setting fire to two Cincinnati abortion clinics and for trying to bomb another, such actions are justified.

    ...During the 1980s, Brockhoeft was a mail handler who lived in Hebron, Ky. Raised a Methodist, he later became a self-described fundamentalist Christian. He credits a column written by conservative Pat Buchanan in 1984 for inspiring his attacks on clinics.

  •  Confused about pro-birtherism... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rocksout, 6ZONite, irishwitch

    Aren't those the people who believe that everybody should be considered born in Hawaii, regardless of whether or not they were born in Kenya?

  •  Love that link (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    howabout, 6ZONite, irishwitch

    to the protestors in Ohio. They all want abortion "illegal" but no legal repercussion to the women who have them? Bizarre.

    "Onward through the fog!" - Oat Willie

    by rocksout on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 03:24:49 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site