Most Americans favor more restrictions on Abortion- is Roe v. Wade out of touch?

A new poll conducted by the Marist College for the Knights of Columbus found the following results:

when asked their view about abortion:

8 percent of U.S. residents chose option 1, that abortion should be available to a woman any time she wants one during her entire pregnancy;

• 8 percent chose option 2, that abortion should be allowed only during the first 6 months of pregnancy;

• 24 percent chose option 3, that abortion should be allowed only during the first 3 months of pregnancy;

• 32 percent chose option 4, that abortion should be allowed only in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother;

• 15 percent chose option 5, that abortion should be allowed only to save the life of the mother; and

• 13 percent chose option 6, that abortion should never be permitted under any circumstance.

The poll also revealed that only 15 percent of those describing themselves as "pro-choice" favored unrestricted abortion throughout a pregnancy. 71 percent of pro-choice respondents said they would restrict significantly restrict abortions. Of these 43 percent would restrict abortion to the first trimester and 23 percent would restrict abortion only to cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother.

so politically speaking the Democratic Party Platform which "unequivocally and strongly supports a woman's right (or as the Pope would say alleged right) to abortion, regardless of ability to pay for it (does this mean they want the government to fund it?)" may be a bit out of touch. Although same can be said about the Republicans.

....a poll conducted by a institution of the Roman Catholic Church found that people wanted restrictions on abortion?

That's amazing. :roll:

oh man. please look at the source next time

....a poll conducted by a institution of the Roman Catholic Church found that people wanted restrictions on abortion?

That's amazing. :roll:

hokies1313

What would you expect the Knights of Columbus to conduct a poll on; whether pickles were a popular food item? Of course they are going to fund a poll on something they have a vested interest in, but if you had read further, you'd have noted that the poll was conducted by the Marist College Institute of Public Opinion.

Now, knowing nothing about that particular organization, this could still be dubious, but this isn't automatically unfounded an completely biased just because theKnights of Columbus are involved. If Planned Parenthood had conducted a poll, I wonder how many would object...

[QUOTE="hokies1313"]

....a poll conducted by a institution of the Roman Catholic Church found that people wanted restrictions on abortion?

That's amazing. :roll:

JoeRatz16

The Knights of Columbus is a Catholic fraternal benefits organization headquartered in New Haven, Conn.Jandurin

What would you expect the Knights of Columbus to conduct a poll on; whether pickles were a popular food item? Of course they are going to fund a poll on something they have a vested interest in, but if you had read further, you'd have noted that the poll was conducted by the Marist College Institute of Public Opinion.

Now, knowing nothing about that particular organization, this could still be dubious, but this isn't automatically unfounded an completely biased just because theKnights of Columbus are involved. If Planned Parenthood had conducted a poll, I wonder how many would object...

3KindgomsRandy

[QUOTE="Jandurin"]The Knights of Columbus is a Catholic fraternal benefits organization headquartered in New Haven, Conn.JoeRatz16

[QUOTE="3KindgomsRandy"]

What would you expect the Knights of Columbus to conduct a poll on; whether pickles were a popular food item? Of course they are going to fund a poll on something they have a vested interest in, but if you had read further, you'd have noted that the poll was conducted by the Marist College Institute of Public Opinion.

Now, knowing nothing about that particular organization, this could still be dubious, but this isn't automatically unfounded an completely biased just because theKnights of Columbus are involved. If Planned Parenthood had conducted a poll, I wonder how many would object...

Jandurin

Okay, so we move to the dubious column then. :P

[QUOTE="JoeRatz16"][QUOTE="hokies1313"]

....a poll conducted by a institution of the Roman Catholic Church found that people wanted restrictions on abortion?

That's amazing. :roll:

Jandurin

[QUOTE="JoeRatz16"][QUOTE="Jandurin"]The Knights of Columbus is a Catholic fraternal benefits organization headquartered in New Haven, Conn.Jandurin

they polled people at random.JoeRatz16

Rights are not decided by popular vote, so wether or not the public agree with the womans right to choose (in the democrat's eyes) makes no difference as to wether that right should be defended or not.Mr_sprinkles

then what are rights decided by? JoeRatz16

The Supreme Court, the biggest case of circular reasoning in history.

[QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"]Rights are not decided by popular vote, so wether or not the public agree with the womans right to choose (in the democrat's eyes) makes no difference as to wether that right should be defended or not.JoeRatz16

[QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"]Rights are not decided by popular vote, so wether or not the public agree with the womans right to choose (in the democrat's eyes) makes no difference as to wether that right should be defended or not.JoeRatz16

[QUOTE="hokies1313"]

....a poll conducted by a institution of the Roman Catholic Church found that people wanted restrictions on abortion?

That's amazing. :roll:

JoeRatz16

Even so. It only asked Registered voters. And where does it show how it polled them? Did it send letters? Don't you think pro-lifers would be more likely to respond. Come on, this is a joke.Jandurin

Great point. the person that is fine with things as they are is less likely be bothered with a poll than ones with a gripe.

So you're arguing for the Tyranny of the Majority?...sweet stuff.

[QUOTE="JoeRatz16"][QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"]Rights are not decided by popular vote, so wether or not the public agree with the womans right to choose (in the democrat's eyes) makes no difference as to wether that right should be defended or not.Mr_sprinkles

The woman's body isn't the one being thrown into an orange hazmat bag after the procedure.

Roe v. Wade is the single most cruel and unconstitutional ruling the Supreme Court has ever made. Oh, but the Supreme Court decides what's Constitutional; how silly of me.:roll:

[QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"][QUOTE="JoeRatz16"][QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"]Rights are not decided by popular vote, so wether or not the public agree with the womans right to choose (in the democrat's eyes) makes no difference as to wether that right should be defended or not.Theokhoth

The woman's body isn't the one being thrown into an orange hazmat bag after the procedure.

Roe v. Wade is the single mostcruel and unconstitutional ruling the Supremem Court has ever made. Oh, but the Supremem Court decides what's Constitutional; how silly of me.:roll:

So you're arguing for the Tyranny of the Majority?...sweet stuff.

jointed

Tyranny of the Minority's pretty sweet, too.

Oh, but the Supreme Court decides what's Constitutional; how silly of me.:roll:

Theokhoth

what has any of that to do with my previous post?Mr_sprinkles

"The woman has the right to her own body."

Her own body is not even affected by the procedure; it's the fetus's body that is, and it is a separate entity.

[QUOTE="jointed"]

So you're arguing for the Tyranny of the Majority?...sweet stuff.

Theokhoth

Tyranny of the Minority's pretty sweet, too.

Irrelevant though :)

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

Oh, but the Supreme Court decides what's Constitutional; how silly of me.:roll:

Jandurin

And what the Constitution says is interpreteted and decided and, if necessary, changed by the Supreme Court.

So basically, if the Supreme Court rules that people have the right to slavery, what they rule is Constitutional, because they cannot make an unconstitutional ruling because they decide what is constitutional in the first place. Circular reasoning.

[QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"]what has any of that to do with my previous post?Theokhoth

"The woman has the right to her own body."

Her own body is not even affected by the procedure; it's the fetus's body that is, and it is a separate entity.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="jointed"]

So you're arguing for the Tyranny of the Majority?...sweet stuff.

jointed

Tyranny of the Minority's pretty sweet, too.

Irrelevant though :)

Not really. If you're invoking tyranny of the majority (in a country that puts a good bit of weight on majority votes) then I invoke tyranny of the minority.

[QUOTE="Jandurin"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

Oh, but the Supreme Court decides what's Constitutional; how silly of me.:roll:

Theokhoth

And what the Constitution says is interpreteted and decided and, if necessary, changed by the Supreme Court.

So basically, if the Supreme Court rules that people have the right to slavery, what they rule is Constitutional, because they cannot make an unconstitutional ruling because they decide what is constitutional in the first place. Circular reasoning.

Her body is affected by both the procedure and the pregnancy. That damn thing is sappin' her energies.Jandurin

Her energies are sapped by work. Is her workplace her own body now? Her home? Her breastfeeding newborn?

Like I said, she's not the one thrown in an orange hazmat bag after it's done.

[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="jointed"]

So you're arguing for the Tyranny of the Majority?...sweet stuff.

Theokhoth

Tyranny of the Minority's pretty sweet, too.

Irrelevant though :)

Not really. If you're invoking tyranny of the majority (in a country that puts a good bit of weight on majority votes) then I invoke tyranny of the minority.

Oh I see, I didn't know that this "minority" had any legeslative powers.

Right, because times change, and we need to be able to keep up with them. I would absolutely hate to live in a place where we HAD to live by EVERY old rule thought up by incredibly old and dead men.Jandurin

How is that relevant with what I said? Keeping up with the times is fine; keeping with the times with an arbitrary group deciding who does and does not have rights is not the way to do it.

Again: The Supreme Court could rule tomorrow that slavery is a Constitutional right and their ruling would be constitutional due to the fact that all Supreme Court rulings are constitutional since they're from the Supreme Court.

[QUOTE="Mr_sprinkles"]what has any of that to do with my previous post?Theokhoth

"The woman has the right to her own body."

Her own body is not even affected by the procedure; it's the fetus's body that is, and it is a separate entity.

just because a foetus has a right to life, and a mothers womb grants it that life, doesn't mean it has the right to a that mother's womb.

A man on a surgeon's table has a right to life, and that life might only be granted by you giving blood. That doesn't mean that he has the right to your blood.

Oh I see, I didn't know that this "minority" had any legeslative powers.

jointed

I didn't know the majority had to be persecuting the minority every time they make something legal or illegal, like prenatal infanticide.

Again: The Supreme Court could rule tomorrow that slavery is a Constitutional right and their ruling would be constitutional due to the fact that all Supreme Court rulings are constitutional since they're from the Supreme Court.

Theokhoth

Her body is dramatically effected by the procedure- it will no longer have a foetus in it. It may be a separate entity, but that doesn't mean it has the right to be there.

just because a foetus has a right to life, and a mothers womb grants it that life, doesn't mean it has the right to a that mother's womb.

A man on a surgeon's table has a right to life, and that life might only be granted by you giving blood. That doesn't mean that he has the right to your blood.

Mr_sprinkles

Here's the thing: removing the fetus will kill it, thus taking away its right to life. Since we can't take away its right to life, it does, in fact, have every right in the universe to be there until it can survive outside of it, which is when it's born.

The man on the table doesn't have the right to my blood unless we're already sharing blood and me removing my blodd from him will kill him.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

Again: The Supreme Court could rule tomorrow that slavery is a Constitutional right and their ruling would be constitutional due to the fact that all Supreme Court rulings are constitutional since they're from the Supreme Court.

Jandurin

They said the same thing about abortion forty years ago.;)

But you're missing my point: The Supreme Court can make any tyrannical ruling they want and that ruling becomes American Law. Rulings from such an arbitrary authority cannot be considered good rulings simply because that authority made them.

But you're missing my point: The Supreme Court can make any tyrannical ruling they want and that ruling becomes American Law. Rulings from such an arbitrary authority cannot be considered good rulings simply because that authority made them.

Theokhoth

[QUOTE="hokies1313"]

....a poll conducted by a institution of the Roman Catholic Church found that people wanted restrictions on abortion?

That's amazing. :roll:

JoeRatz16

No, my step-father was a member of that organization. I'm just saying that it might be a tad biased.

[QUOTE="jointed"]

Oh I see, I didn't know that this "minority" had any legeslative powers.

Theokhoth

I didn't know the majority had to be persecuting the minority every time they make something legal or illegal, like prenatal infanticide.

Persecuting? I don't know where you got that from.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

But you're missing my point: The Supreme Court can make any tyrannical ruling they want and that ruling becomes American Law. Rulings from such an arbitrary authority cannot be considered good rulings simply because that authority made them.

Jandurin

Then please tell me what it is, as you've been avoiding my point this whole time.

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="jointed"]

Oh I see, I didn't know that this "minority" had any legeslative powers.

jointed

I didn't know the majority had to be persecuting the minority every time they make something legal or illegal, like prenatal infanticide.

Persecuting? I don't know where you got that from.

Yoiu brought up tyranny of the majority. Tyranny for one group is persecution for another.;)