by Mark Silva
Has the tide of public opinion on abortion rights turned?
The Gallup Poll suggests it has:
More Americans are calling themselves "pro-life'' on the question of abortion than those calling themselves "pro-choice'' - the first time that the balance of opinion has swung that way since Gallup started asking this question in 1995.
And, for the first time, women are just as likely as men now to call themselves pro-life - though the shift in opinion from last year to this year is largely seen among Republicans surveyed, with Democrats still "pro-choice'' by about 2:1.
The pro-life camp weighed in at 51 percent in the newest Gallup Poll, conducted May 7-10, the pro-choice camp at 42 percent of those surveyed. This represents a marked turn from last year, when 50 percent of those surveyed called themselves pro-choice, 44 pro-life.
"The new results, obtained from Gallup's annual Values and Beliefs survey, represent a significant shift from a year ago,'' Gallup reports, adding:
"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 percent) as say it should be legal under any circumstances (22 percent).
"This contrasts with the last four years, when Gallup found a strong tilt of public attitudes in favor of unrestricted abortion.''
It isn't just this poll, Gallup reports.
"The same three abortion questions... were included in Gallup Poll Daily tracking from May 12-13, with nearly identical results, including a 50 percent to 43 percent pro-life versus pro-choice split on the self-identification question.''
In addition, Gallup notes, 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 percent.
The shift has largely come among Republicans in the Gallup surveys: The number of Republican and Republican-leaning people surveyed calling themselves "pro-life" rose by 10 points over the past year, from 60 to 70 percent, "while there has been essentially no change in the views of Democrats and Democratic leaners.''
Democrats still call themselves pro-choice by a two-to-one margin.
A gender gap has disappeared in the shift:.
A year ago, Gallup found more women calling themselves pro-choice than pro-life, by 50 o 43 percent, while men were more closely divided: 49 percent pro-choice, 46 percent pro-life.
"Now,'' Gallup notes, "because of heightened pro-life sentiment.... 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.''
"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,'' Gallup notes. "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.''
The survey of 1,015 national adults conducted May 7-10 carries a possible margin of error of 3 percentage points.
Comments
Just great - America is finally waking up to "A Life is a Life "
Posted by: Inky | May 15, 2009 9:11 AM
"America is finally waking up to "A Life is a Life " Posted by: Inky
Unless it's a Muslim, eh Inky?
Posted by: dinky | May 15, 2009 9:51 AM
Pre-menopausal women better make their views known.
More broadly, the anti-health care reform forces will roll this issue into their campaign.
That's why Obama really, really needed someone with the star power of a Sanjay Gupta to spearhead the reform effort.
The Harry&Louise commercials have already begun in Chicago: "I had to wait 9 months for an appointment for my cancer surgery in Canada and I died in the meantime!" sort of stuff.
It's already on the air.
The whole agenda is starting to deflate like a souffle in a beginner cooking class.
Health care will be watered down to the point most people won't be able to see any improvement.
There won't be any meaningful inquiry into Halliburton, Blackwater, or Torture; now the inquiry will be whether Pelosi is telling the truth.
The weakness of the President's backfield is going to become increasingly apparent.
Posted by: ornery | May 15, 2009 9:55 AM
So, the majority of Americans are for stricter gun control and what has that achieved? More killings, more guns and morons !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, America | May 15, 2009 11:05 AM
Since liberals love to use Gallup polls as the basis for every policy decision, whether it be nationalizing health care or gay marriage, or whatever, is it safe to say that liberals will now support overturning Roe v. Wade?
Because, you know, the Gallup poll just "proves" that the majority of people in this country are pro-life and therefore anti-abortion and blah blah blah.
I expect to hear crickets from the liberal blogosphere on this one.
Posted by: John | May 15, 2009 11:27 AM
Depends on how you ask the questions, doesn't it?
For example, if you asked most folks:
"If your daughter got knocked up by some co-worker at the hamburger stand where she has to work to keep your household afloat, should she be able to get an abortion pronto?"
How do you think they would answer?
Posted by: Milton Friedman | May 15, 2009 11:41 AM
Milton has a good point on the wording of the question. Do these women really want to impose their pro-life view on all women by making abortion illegal in all cases?
Posted by: Flo | May 15, 2009 12:36 PM
Yea, let's go back to the good old days of High School when girls had to dig out fetuses with coat hangers.
Or cross boarders to have abortions if you daddy could afford it.
Hemoraging, infections, death...that sounds better.
Posted by: basementfrog | May 15, 2009 12:38 PM
So, the majority of Americans are for stricter gun control and what has that achieved? More killings, more guns and morons !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, America | May 15, 2009 11:05 AM
And the majority of Americans favored Obama and the DEMS last November and in '06 and what has that achieved?- Or is this what you mean by more morons?
**In 100 days we have tripled our debt with a promise of more to come...
Obama has more than doubled down on your "prince of darkness" Bush's deficit spending...
And in return we get;
**A President that is only coherent when he is apologizing to the rest of the world for the US being so successful...
**Congressional leadership dumb enough to politicize anti -terrorist activity that they signed off on after 9/11...
Other "gifts" from the so called "progressive" left-
We are literally sitting on a huge fortunes of proven energy resources - coal, oil, shale - and what do we get? We shut down oil production and xploration and engage in a debate on cap and trade to limit our ability to support ourselves and our economy... we are literally borrowing money from the chinese in order to support this president and majorities parties' socialistic economic ideology---
What could be more moronic than that?
Posted by: heartburn | May 15, 2009 1:13 PM
Posted by: Flo | May 15, 2009 12:36 PM
and
Posted by: Milton Friedman | May 15, 2009 11:41 AM
Fine- lets talk about this in words that are not ambiguous..
Pro Choice? = Pro- ending an unborn childs life.
My body my choice= My body is more important than the life my body is carrying.
Pro life = Pro Life..not sure how else to put this...
Posted by: heartburn | May 15, 2009 1:20 PM
Hemoraging, infections, death...that sounds better.
Posted by: basementfrog | May 15, 2009 12:38 PM
You could use the same terms to describe partial birth or late term abortions....
Posted by: heartburn | May 15, 2009 1:23 PM
Whether a true shift has occurred is uncertain and is further confounded by issues of sampling error. However, even assuming the poll accurately reflects public tendencies toward self-labeling ("life" vs "choice"), it’s not clear that it reflects a fundamental shift in opinions about policy. The poll shows that a majority (53%) believe abortion should be legal in some but not all circumstances, and this figure has been remarkably constant over the past 35 years. Similarly, there has been little change in the extremes - 23% believing it should be legal always, and 22% never. In essence, most who label themselves "pro-life" support the availability of abortion in some circumstances, and the same is true for those who label themselves "pro-choice". At this point, it is reasonable to conclude that the majority of Americans hold a moderate position on abortion and reject the extremes, and that this moderate stance has little prospect of changing dramatically in the future.
Posted by: bill r. | May 15, 2009 1:43 PM
This is not all or nothing - we need the application of some common sense to this disaster of public health. Abortion should be between a woman and her family physician - not between a woman and an abortion clinic. ..............
http://thefiresidepost.com/2009/05/06/abortion-and-common-sense/
Posted by: Ohg Rea Tone | May 15, 2009 1:44 PM
Just great - America is finally waking up to "A Life is a Life "
Posted by: Inky | May 15, 2009 9:11 AM
That applies to then governor of Texas George W. Bush, when he executed almost 200 people, right?
Or in your mind are some lives "more valuable" than other lives?
Posted by: BC | May 15, 2009 2:44 PM
Heartburn, when you look further into the polling, only 22% actually want to outlaw abortion entirely; to me, that means 78% are pro choice. So there is definitely a vareity of definitions. Pro choice means I won't tell you or others what they should decide to do.
Posted by: Flo | May 15, 2009 2:58 PM
Heartburn, when you look further into the polling, only 22% actually want to outlaw abortion entirely; to me, that means 78% are pro choice. So there is definitely a vareity of definitions. Pro choice means I won't tell you or others what they should decide to do.
Posted by: Flo | May 15, 2009 2:58 PM
Flo- Way to cook the books! you would be wrong in drawing your -% pro choice- conclusion...
Small point but- actually the poll says 23% (not 22%) want to outlaw abortion - making 77% (in your twist) pro-choice.
Using your logic- when the poll says that 22% "say it should be legal under any circumstances " This would mean that 78% are pro-life?
Your "definition" allows for a 78% pro llife and 77% pro-choice breakout... mathematically impossible!
face it- a majority( and growing) number of people are not pro -choice, abortion on demand extremists..
Posted by: heartburn | May 15, 2009 5:32 PM
Well Heartburn, had BUSH done anything in 8 years besides 'keeping us safe', Obama wouldn't have had to bail out the Country.
And reality is Gallup can say what they will, but we'll still have clinics that take care of unwanted fetus', sorry conservatives, that's just how it is.
Posted by: Randolph | May 15, 2009 6:14 PM
No Heartburn; but the point is how people define pro-life; I personally don't see how you can be pro life and leave abortion legal, but some people apparently do. I was trying to converse, not cook the books, but you must be too dense.
Posted by: Flo | May 15, 2009 7:18 PM
I lived in England in the 1970s. Once, while waiting to see my gynecologist, I heard a huge commotion and then two women came flying out of the doctor's examination area, one in Arab dress. My Dr. explained that the younger woman was pregnant and not married. The older woman, a college counselor, was trying to convince her that she needed to have an abortion or her family would kill her. She denied that she was pregnant (!) -- but eventually was convinced that she was pregnant and that she needed to have the termination. Fortunately, the British national health system at that time offered abortion services in situations that involved the mother's health. Since this girl's family would have killed both her and the baby, because of family honor, the abortion actually saved a life. How can we have a law that only protects the unborn, and doesn't consider the mother? This was an extreme case, but it symbolizes what happens when a woman's rights are suspended for whatever reason.
Posted by: burnan | May 15, 2009 10:35 PM
DNA proves that life starts at conception, therefore abortion is a crime.
Posted by: m. olsen | May 16, 2009 12:24 AM
okay, here goes......
I think ANYONE for WHATEVER reason wants to legislate what a woman wants to do with her pregnancy should take FULL responsibility for the pregnancy.
So, in other words, if you vote to reverse Roe v Wade, you must register with the IRS and be compelled to contribute to a special fund to take care of these unwanted children OR YOU can opt to adopt.
There it is, pro choice folks and pro choice "christian" organizaions (especially the Catholic Religion).......open up your wallets and be ready to put your money where your mouth is........YOU can take care of these poor unwanted children and do your best to make sure they do not turn into criminals and dysfunctional human beings.
Otherwise, if YOU are not willing to take this responsibility on......why are you demanding and trying to FORCE others to do the same?
Posted by: Neu | May 16, 2009 9:34 AM
BC @ 2:44 p.m.
So George Bush, governor, "executed" 200 people +/-? Not questioning your facts BC, but I did not realize that some many pieces of sludge were given their final reward during his rule. It appears that you may have uncovered yet another crime, or more accurately, spree of crimes, commited by the master criminal (MC) George Bush. BUT, you commit a serious faux pas, an error, if you will, with the teary-eyed suggestion that these lives might have been "valuable", somehow. Well, here is the Merriam-Webster definition of "valuable".
Valuable:
1 a: having monetary value
1 b: worth a good price
2 a: having desirable or esteemed characteristics or qualities
2 b: of great use or service <valuable
So, for the 200, Cut Your throat and Mine for a pack of cigarettes, life-long recidivist, Guilty as Accused and a whole lot more but there is not enough time or money to pursue within the Legal System, FOR REAL Criminals that MC George Bush executed, which of these 2 or 4 definitions do YOU think would apply? I have a very serious problem with the words "monetary", "price", "esteemed", "use", and "service". Only an "esteemed" Liberal can settle this. Gonna need a little Help.
heartburn,
I also did not realize that Don Fitzgerald apparently has tagged George Bush with "prince of darkness". Liberals are just so priceless with their little charmless analogies. Must rememeber that one. Thanx for casting some illumination on that one. Now I have the paired set - "Prince of Darkness" (GB) and "Darth Vader" (DC). Priceless.
Posted by: Django - N Exile In/Around the 30th Parallel | May 17, 2009 12:38 AM