According to the New York Times, it doesn’t really matter, because you
probably don’t understand the terms anyway.
According to the Times the recent Gallup Poll showing that a majority
of Americans are pro-life is faulty at best, and downright sinister at
worst.
The poll, conducted May 7-10, found that 51% of Americans are now
“calling themselves ‘pro-life’ on the issue of abortion and 42%
‘pro-choice.’ According to Gallup, 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.”
Not only did Gallup find these results to be consistent in two other
surveys, they also gave a rather forthright opinion as to why they
thought this shift was occurring. President Obama’s radical policies,
Gallup said, are actually alienating many Americans who would consider
themselves to be “pro-choice,” causing them to shift over toward the
pro-life position:
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.
This sounds quite reasonable to me. Having a president who is radically
pro-abortion might well cause the significant shift in opinions
concerning abortion that Gallup detected.
Liberal opinion leaders, however, have been quick to condemn the poll
as faulty, irrelevant, or simplistic.
“Young people are not suddenly turning prolife,” scoffs Ruth Coniff of
The Progressive. “They just view the abortion issue differently. The
fact that we grew up in the era of safe, legal abortion makes women
under the age of 50 a bit complacent about the issue.”
Mark Mellman of The Hill agrees, saying that “typically, after some
useless result escapes into the ether, reporters and interest groups
proceed to spin some new theory of public opinion based on faulty
analysis of a meaningless question.”
Dalia Sussman of the New York Times goes even further. She first says
that it “does not necessarily indicate a marked shift in Americans’
views on this highly complicated issue.” Then she cites other polling
data done by different agencies to show how the numbers vary. She
concludes by insulting the people Gallup polled, saying that “there is
no way of knowing whether people being asked the question even know
what the two labels mean.”
The shift in polling data—and the liberals’ efforts to discredit it--is
cast into sharp relief by President Obama’s recent address at Notre
Dame. The President, in his speech, expressed the hope that pro-life
and pro-choice advocates could find “common ground” on the subject of
abortion.
“Let's work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by
reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoption more available,
and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to
term,” said Obama. “Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree
with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure
that all of our health care policies are grounded in clear ethics and
sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women.”
This speech, which is full of such glowing, hopeful rhetoric, rings
hollow when compared with Obama’s record. What in the world does he
mean by a “sensible conscience clause”, given that he has already
struck down existing conscience provisions?
Obama’s rhetorical flourishes are cited ad nauseam by the media as
evidence of “bipartisan progress,” but they are actually little more
than deceptive propaganda.
Pro-lifers have not, and will not, be lulled to sleep by such
mouthings. We realize that human life is at stake. We agree that women
should have better gynecological care; that there should be fewer teen
pregnancies, that there should be more adoption. We agree that women
should be happy and safe and free. But we will not willingly allow
anyone to take a human life, which is what an abortion does.
It is thus ludicrous to suggest that the two sides “work together” on
the issue of abortion. There can be no common ground on the morality of
abortion..
I believe that, contra the New York Times, those surveyed by the Gallup
poll knew exactly what they were being asked when they were questioned
on whether or not they were “pro-life” or “pro-choice.” The terms
outline positions that have existed on our political landscape for more
than 30 years. To suggest that somehow, the idea of the pro-life
movement is shifting, becoming more oriented around issues that “really
matter,” like women’s health or reproductive freedom, is naïve.
And to President Obama: it’s our movement, you can join us if you like,
but the terms of the debate are already well defined, and are not
subject to redefinition.
Contact: Colin Mason
Source: Population Research Institute
Publish
Date: June 29, 2009
Link
to this article.
Send
this article to a friend.
The IFRL is the largest grassroots pro-life organization in
Illinois. A non-profit organization, that serves as the state
coordinating body for local pro-life chapters representing thousands of
Illinois citizens working to restore respect for all human life in our
society. The IFRL is composed of people of different political
persuasions, various faiths and diverse economic, social and ethnic
backgrounds. Since 1973 the Illinois Federation for Right to Life has
been working to end abortion and restore legal protection to those members of the
human family who are threatened by abortion, infanticide and euthanasia. Diverse though we are, we hold one common belief - that
every human being has an inalienable right to life that is precious and must be protected. IFRL is
dedicated to restoring the right to life to the unborn, and protection
for the disabled and the elderly. Click here to learn more about the IFRL.
|