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

[GabonX]

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.

Sick of coppying, if you want the rest go to the gallup site.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/118399/More- ... -Time.aspx

[Juan_Bottom]

Who cares?
The real question is how have these numbers affected/effected the numbers of Abortions?

Because if they are unwaivering, I say that Gallup can stick this poll up their asses. And if they have gone down, then good work Gallup.

[GabonX]

I don't think it's Gallup's aim to try to influence actions. Rather they are gathering data.

[got tonkaed]

I don't think it's Gallup's aim to try to influence actions. Rather they are gathering data.

+1 imo

[Hologram]

It's also likely that this could be a bit of an outlier survey. Based on the randomness of it, they could have just gathered more information from those that oppose abortion than those that approve it. Now, there are ways to reduce this probability in the way that surveys are handled, and I'm sure Gallup has done everything in their power, but unless they're conducting a full census (which they didn't) the chance is still there.

I would like to see a trend over several surveys showing that the tables have turned before I buy into it wholeheartedly.

[got tonkaed]

It's also likely that this could be a bit of an outlier survey. Based on the randomness of it, they could have just gathered more information from those that oppose abortion than those that approve it. Now, there are ways to reduce this probability in the way that surveys are handled, and I'm sure Gallup has done everything in their power, but unless they're conducting a full census (which they didn't) the chance is still there.

I would like to see a trend over several surveys showing that the tables have turned before I buy into it wholeheartedly.

I guess where i have less of an issue with giving it credibility is that the likely source of expansion makes plenty of sense.

[PLAYER57832]

It's also likely that this could be a bit of an outlier survey. Based on the randomness of it, they could have just gathered more information from those that oppose abortion than those that approve it. Now, there are ways to reduce this probability in the way that surveys are handled, and I'm sure Gallup has done everything in their power, but unless they're conducting a full census (which they didn't) the chance is still there.

I would like to see a trend over several surveys showing that the tables have turned before I buy into it wholeheartedly.

A. Gallup is one of the most trusted sources of overall opinion data we have. No survey is perfect, but Gallop is accurate.

[Hologram]

It's also likely that this could be a bit of an outlier survey. Based on the randomness of it, they could have just gathered more information from those that oppose abortion than those that approve it. Now, there are ways to reduce this probability in the way that surveys are handled, and I'm sure Gallup has done everything in their power, but unless they're conducting a full census (which they didn't) the chance is still there.

I would like to see a trend over several surveys showing that the tables have turned before I buy into it wholeheartedly.

A. Gallup is one of the most trusted sources of overall opinion data we have. No survey is perfect, but Gallop is accurate.

Yes, I realize this, but having taken statistics before, I realize that there is a possibility of error in every survey. I'm just saying I want to see more surveys back this up before I buy it completely.

In fact, I'm almost entirely sure I said all of that in my original post.

[HapSmo19]

Hey, Sweden just made it legal to abort a child if you don't like the gender.

You have to admit,...that's pretty progressive.

[got tonkaed]

Hey, Sweden just made it legal to abort a child if you don't like the gender.

You have to admit,...that's pretty progressive.

kinda silly imo, if your gonna do on choice, there shouldnt have to be a reason. Put in protections against late term abortions and let the chips fall where they may if your gonna go that route.

[GabonX]

Why the fuss over late term abortion? A child's brain isn't fully developed for at least ten years. Abortion might as well be legal until a child is at least 2 years old as that's when they start to talk.

I think that as pro choicers we should agree that abortion should be legal until a child learns to say "no, I want to live!"

[got tonkaed]

Why the fuss over late term abortion? A child's brain isn't fully developed for at least ten years. Abortion might as well be legal until a child is at least 2 years old as that's when they start to talk.

I think that as pro choicers we should agree that abortion should be legal until a child learns to say "no, I want to live!"

clearly it would be a big deal to make the issue about the brain to begin with.

[PLAYER57832]

It's also likely that this could be a bit of an outlier survey. Based on the randomness of it, they could have just gathered more information from those that oppose abortion than those that approve it. Now, there are ways to reduce this probability in the way that surveys are handled, and I'm sure Gallup has done everything in their power, but unless they're conducting a full census (which they didn't) the chance is still there.

I would like to see a trend over several surveys showing that the tables have turned before I buy into it wholeheartedly.

A. Gallup is one of the most trusted sources of overall opinion data we have. No survey is perfect, but Gallop is accurate.

Yes, I realize this, but having taken statistics before, I realize that there is a possibility of error in every survey. I'm just saying I want to see more surveys back this up before I buy it completely.

In fact, I'm almost entirely sure I said all of that in my original post.

Its not the number of surveys, its the quality that counts. One well-conducted survey trumps 50 ill-conceived ones. Gallup is known for its accuracy for general information surveys.

And "having taken statistics" or not .. if you think Gallup publishes "outlier polls" without clearly stating so, you don't know much about Gallup or its surveys. They always give parameters and error ranges in their data. Of course, if you are reading the third or fourth hand information, then things often get skewed by those other sources.

[HapSmo19]

I think that as pro choicers we should agree that abortion should be legal until a child learns to say "no, I want to live!"

That's too soon. At two or three, do they really know what it means to live?

I propose abortion be legal til they realize communism is the only way.

[PLAYER57832]

Why the fuss over late term abortion? A child's brain isn't fully developed for at least ten years. Abortion might as well be legal until a child is at least 2 years old as that's when they start to talk.

I think that as pro choicers we should agree that abortion should be legal until a child learns to say "no, I want to live!"

Why is it that any discussion about abortion automatically goes to "well, if you think aborting an 8 month child is OK..."

Its the same lack of logic you used in the gun thread.

Furthermore, even those who support legalized abortion (the sane ones anyway, there are crazies in every bunch) don't like abortion. The question is whether to make them safe and legal or expect the police to arrest mothers and doctors instead of offering birth control and education as the primary prevention means.

The question is whether parents facing the most difficult decision of anyone's life.. what to do with a child who is severely, severely injured.. can consult with their clergy, thier doctors and family and make that decision in private or whether you, who have never had a child, sitting comfortably in your chair in another city (or remote rural area) have the right to step in and make that decision for them.

[PLAYER57832]

Hey, Sweden just made it legal to abort a child if you don't like the gender.

You have to admit,...that's pretty progressive.

Of course its not "progressive", its shameful. The only good thing is that at least in Sweden you are likely to see a reasonable mix of genders, unlike -- say China or India, where its almost legal to outright kill girl babies.

[bedub1]

I am both for and against abortion. Cause if I got a girl prego right now, i'm not ready to be father. And if she won't give it up for adoption, i'd prefer she aborted it. As soon as possible...like within the 1st month. But I'm against it, especially when it's "Partially born", like half in half out and then they kill it. If you are going to do it, do it way sooner than that.

[StiffMittens]

I am both for and against abortion. Cause if I got a girl prego right now, i'm not ready to be father. And if she won't give it up for adoption, i'd prefer she aborted it. As soon as possible...like within the 1st month. But I'm against it, especially when it's "Partially born", like half in half out and then they kill it. If you are going to do it, do it way sooner than that.

I think that may, in part, speak to what the Gallup poll is really telling us. I would suspect (not having reviewed the poll in any way - just guessing) that many people have redefined their position as being pro-life in the sense that abortions should be prevented in the manner Player suggested: through education and birth control. I'm basing this solely on my personal observations over the years. I've noticed people "re-branding" their position from "Oh, I'm pro-choice but I would never have an abortion" to "Oh, I'm pro-life, but there are reasonable exceptions - and hopefully some education and contraception will reduce the number of times the issue arises."

[PLAYER57832]

I am both for and against abortion. Cause if I got a girl prego right now, i'm not ready to be father. And if she won't give it up for adoption, i'd prefer she aborted it. As soon as possible...like within the 1st month. But I'm against it, especially when it's "Partially born", like half in half out and then they kill it. If you are going to do it, do it way sooner than that.

This is pretty much the position of most "pro abortion" people.

Except, while I am not advocating Partial Birth,, as distasteful as it sounds and is protrayed in the media, the real truth is that those types of procedures are for very specific situations where other procedures are either far, far more risky to the mother's future childbearing potential (i.e. that child is gone, but how can we best ensure the next one will have the best chance to be healthy) or life. I am not a doctor and am not going to weigh in on specifics, but that is the point.. unless you are one, are in that situation, then you don't really and truly know enough to decide.

And, if you think that ANYONE sane would voluntarily carry a child for 8 months only to decide "oops.. mistake, let's get rid of it", you have not even begun to understand anything about this issue.

ALSO, and this is something a lot of people simply do not know, a woman who has a miscarriage and has the child surgically removed, at least within the first few months, is legally (in most, if not all states) considered to be having an abortion. This is because there simply is no legal distinction for life or non life at that stage. Since the miscarriage rate is 1 in 3 (I don't know the number that require surgical intervention), chances are that someone you know and care about has had one of those "abortions". Understand, that 1 in 3 rate is a true miscarriage rate .. not children who have severe deformities, are unwanted, etc, but children who are no longer living (and note my use of "children", not "fetus"). The abortion rate uses a different measure entirely.. reports of surgeries.

[captain.crazy]

It's also likely that this could be a bit of an outlier survey. Based on the randomness of it, they could have just gathered more information from those that oppose abortion than those that approve it. Now, there are ways to reduce this probability in the way that surveys are handled, and I'm sure Gallup has done everything in their power, but unless they're conducting a full census (which they didn't) the chance is still there.

I would like to see a trend over several surveys showing that the tables have turned before I buy into it wholeheartedly.

You just blew the validity of every survey ever!

[jonka]

I am both for and against abortion. Cause if I got a girl prego right now, i'm not ready to be father. And if she won't give it up for adoption, i'd prefer she aborted it. As soon as possible...like within the 1st month. But I'm against it, especially when it's "Partially born", like half in half out and then they kill it. If you are going to do it, do it way sooner than that.

First of all its really called Intact dilation and extraction, and it only represents 0.17% of abortions. Second of all you have no Idea what the procedure is about, partial birth is a term invented by pro-life lobbyists, Its when an usually dead fetus is not small enough to be removed otherwise. In otherwords they stimulate the female body part into a mock-birth rather than cut a big gaping hole. Its not like a baby is coming out and then they hit it over the head with a hammer.
thats why its got the nickname "partial truth abortion"

[bedub1]

Well if partial birth abortion never happens, why legalize it? Why did everybody freak out when Bush outlawed it? I was fine with that, as long as the survival of the mother isn't at risk, if it is, then obviously her well-being comes first.

[PLAYER57832]

Well if partial birth abortion never happens, why legalize it? Why did everybody freak out when Bush outlawed it? I was fine with that, as long as the survival of the mother isn't at risk, if it is, then obviously her well-being comes first.

Jonka did not say it never happens. Jonka said you were misinformed, as was most of the public, about what it truly entailed.

And as for "obviously her well-being comes first" bit... have you heard the governor of South Dakota talk? The people most strongly pushing to limit abortions have a very clear agenda to limit ALL abortions. Some are not even willing to make the distinction "to save a mother's life". And, of those that allow that, they often want to put in place such severe restrictions that doctors who perform the procedure for any reason may risk jail or serious reprimands.

First of all its really called Intact dilation and extraction, and it only represents 0.17% of abortions.

Do you have a source?
That seems very low based on my experience with other women. (yes, admittedly unscientific) unless it applies strictly to voluntary abortions. (not removal of dead fetus'. A dilation and extraction is reported to be one of the most common surgeries for women. (no, I don't have a specific source, I have heard it reported by a number of both Pro life and pro legalized abortion groups, but never a specific citation to a study or such. It might well be wrong.).

Or, are you referring specifically to the so-called "partial birth" abortions?

Second of all you have no Idea what the procedure is about, partial birth is a term invented by pro-life lobbyists, Its when an usually dead fetus is not small enough to be removed otherwise. In otherwords they stimulate the female body part into a mock-birth rather than cut a big gaping hole. Its not like a baby is coming out and then they hit it over the head with a hammer.
thats why its got the nickname "partial truth abortion"

I will also note that even the "living" fetus are not ones that would live outside the womb or have ANY sort of a real life. And when I say that, I definitely do not mean simply a child who is "not normal". I mean a child doomed to little or no chance of life at all, and that chance only if the child undergoes surgery after surgery, a great deal of pain and no real potential for any but the absolute barest of interactions with those around.

[Juan_Bottom]

I still want to know if the numbers of abortions has gone down. Because if they haven't, then this poll doesn't mean anything.

[PLAYER57832]

I still want to know if the numbers of abortions has gone down. Because if they haven't, then this poll doesn't mean anything.

Unwanted pregnancies, and abortions have been going down in the past e decade due to sex education efforts, better natal care (see below... referencing miscarriages labeled abortions) and yes, better help for mothers in difficult situations of all kinds.

However, they are beginning to rise again.

(hmm... and sex ed is being curtailed in many places.. cooincidence? I think not!).

And, as I said before... a lot of what are labeled "abortions" are really naturally caused miscarriages that are surgically removed. (to use the nicest term possible for a horrible event) And, again, the reason is that there is almost always just no legal/recorded distinction between a live fetus and a miscarriage in the early stages.