A Heartening Trend: Majority of American Adults Pro-Life

A new Gallup pollbrings encouraging news on the subject of abortion.  Fifty percent of American adults now define themselves as pro-life (up 5% from 2011), and 41% of American adults now define themselves as pro-choice (down 8% from 2011).

Gallupfirst started asking American adults how they define themselves on the abortion issue back in 1995.  At that time, 56% of American adults considered themselves pro-choice, whereas 33% of adults defined themselves as pro-life.  Clearly, over the past seventeen years, the trend in this country has been steadily moving toward the pro-life position and away from the pro-choice position, with the majority of American adults now considering themselves pro-life.

According to the poll, the decline in the pro-choice views of American adults runs across the three main political groups in this country:  Republican, Independent, and Democrat.

Among Republicans and Independents, pro-lifers outnumber pro-choicers.  Seventy-two percent of Republicans consider themselves pro-life (up 4% from 2011) compared with 22% who consider themselves pro-choice (down 6% from 2011).  Forty-seven percent of Independents define themselves as pro-life (up 6% from 2011) compared with 41% who define themselves as pro-choice (down 10% from 2011).

Although pro-choice Democrats still outnumber pro-life Democrats, the percentage of pro-choice Democrats has dropped ten points in the last year, from 68% to 58%.  Pro-life Democrats currently make up 34% of the Party, which is a seven point increase over the same time period.

The upward pro-life trend in the country is not limited to older adults.  A 2010 Gallup poll illustrates that Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-nine have been moving in the pro-life direction.  In 2003, 40% of that age group considered themselves pro-life.  By 2010, that percentage had increased seven points to 47%.

I think there are short and long term reasons for the increase in the pro-life position over the past seventeen years since Gallup first starting polling on this matter.

The short term reasons deal with the Obama Administration, which has been ardently pushing its pro-abortion agenda for the past three years.  It started almost from the moment President Obama took office when he issued an Executive Order overturning the “Mexico City Policy” and allowed our tax money to be used overseas to fund abortions.

Recently, it became known that the Obama Administration is imposing an abortion surcharge, as part of ObamaCare, that will require those enrolled in certain job-related health insurance plans to pay a monthly one dollar surcharge to pay for abortions.

In addition, the Obama Administration recently came down with its HHS mandate, requiring people of faith who own businesses with fifty or more employees to provide their employees with abortion-inducing drugs.  The HHS mandate has been met with many lawsuits, including one recently filed by the American Center for Law & Justice on behalf of a private business owner, and the twelve lawsuits filed this past week by forty-three Catholic organizations, including the University of Notre Dame, the Michigan Catholic Conference, and the Archdiocese of New York.

The Obama Administration’s radical pro-abortion efforts have forced Americans to think about the abortion issue more carefully and to determine where they stand on the matter.  As the poll shows, a majority of Americans are deciding to stand on the side of life and not join the Obama Administration on the side of death.

With regard to long term reasons, over the past two decades technology has moved Americans in the pro-life direction.  With the wide availability of ultrasounds, Americans can see that the unborn baby is truly a human being and not a blob of tissue as the abortion industry used to make people believe, especially in the 1970s and 1980s.  Looking at an ultrasound image of an unborn baby leads to only one conclusion:  the unborn baby is a person, no matter how small (to paraphrase Dr. Seuss).

Moreover, one must acknowledge that this pro-life trend has been growing because of the great work pro-life advocates have been doing through the many excellent activities they engage in on a regular basis, for example, providing women alternatives to abortion, educating the public about abortion, witnessing each year at the March for Life in Washington, D.C., and praying to soften the hardened hearts of those who favor abortion and end this evil.

The recent poll is a heartening illustration that we as a nation are moving in the right direction.  This trend will continue as more and more Americans realize how extreme the Obama Administration’s abortion agenda is and how that agenda is implicating all of us in abortion whether through the use of our tax money or through our health insurance policies at work.  It will also continue as more and more Americans become educated and understand that abortion ends the life of a human being.  And, it will continue as more and more Americans pray for the culture of life to replace the culture of death in this country.

Edward White

Edward White is an accomplished attorney with a 20-year legal career that includes extensive experience with federal law.

http://townhall.com/columnists/edwardwhite/2012/05/27/a_heartening_trend_majority_of_american_adults_prolife/page/full/

Aborted Child Born Alive and Left to Die

In Vietnam, a family is distraught because their child was born alive, covered in blankets by the hospital, and left to die. In a twisted scenario where one bad decision led to even worse results, the parents had been convinced to abort their child after seeing ultra-sounds that showed troubling birth defects. After the abortion, the child was placed in a bed under blankets until the family could return to recover the body. But upon returning and removing the blankets, family members saw the child and realized the ultrasounds had been wrong—the child had been born healthy. Moreover, the child was still alive.

However, the child had been bleeding profusely, and although the hospital immediately began working to save the child’s fleeting life, in the end nothing could be done to save it.

Had this terrible situation arisen in Illinois when Barack Obama was a state senator, it would have been illegal for doctors or nurses to try to save the child once it was discovered alive.  For as an Illinois state senator, Obama “voted four times against legislation to protect and care for infants accidentally born alive during late-term abortions.” As Erik Erickson has said: “Obama did not think that a child who was alive and outside the mother’s womb should be considered a child for the purposes of giving the child equal protection rights if it was the mother and doctor’s intention that the child be killed.”

In other words, where death was intended no life could be salvaged.

Thus, it came as no surprise that a House Judiciary Report from 2000 said physicians at one prominent hospital in Chicago had been aborting “healthy infants and infants with non-fatal deformities [and although] many of these babies…lived for hours after birth, no efforts [were] made to determine if any of them could have survived with appropriate medical assistance.”

In one specific example from an Illinois hospital, an aborted baby “left to die on the counter of the soiled utility room wrapped in a disposable towel, was accidentally thrown in the garbage.” Later, when hospital staff realize what had happened and begin looking for the child, they “were going through the trash [and] the baby fell out of the towel and on to the floor.”

I’m a bit confused here: Is this part of Obama’s promise of “hope and change” or simply a precursor of his pledge to “fundamentally change America”?

Think again about the child in Vietnam. There, the discovery of a live baby was a traumatizing experience to which everyone responded by trying to save the child’s life: the room was frantic with people fighting for life. But in Chicago, Illinoiswhich was Obama’s Illinois—it would have been illegal to try to save the child’s life, just as it was illegal to try to save the life of any child who’d survived abortion.

Here’s the bottom line: In Vietnam an aborted child was born alive, but left to die—just like Obama would have wanted it.

AWR Hawkins

AWR Hawkins is weekly contributor to Andrew Breitbart’s “BIG” sites, a columnist for Pajamas Media, and a contributor to RedCounty.com. He holds a PhD in US military history from Texas Tech University.

http://townhall.com/columnists/awrhawkins/2012/05/23/aborted_child_born_alive_and_left_to_die/page/full/

‘Doe’ describes odd twist in landmark abortion case #OneNewsNow.com#

‘Doe’ describes odd twist in landmark abortion case #OneNewsNow.com#.

Abortionist going into family practice (OneNewsNow.com)

Abortionist going into family practice (OneNewsNow.com).

 

We have to thank God every time an abortionist stops killing innocent babies!!  This man decides to start a new line of work!

Pro-aborts recognize dwindling support (OneNewsNow.com)

Pro-aborts recognize dwindling support (OneNewsNow.com).

Utah Becomes First State to Have 72-Hour Waiting Period for Abortion By Michael Gryboski

Utah has become the first state to enact a 72-hour waiting period for women seeking an abortion. The new law took effect on Tuesday.

Sponsored by Republican Representative Steve Eliason, HB 461 expands the previous 24-hour waiting period for an abortion by two days, making it the longest waiting period in the country.

Introduced in February, HB 461 was passed by the Utah House in early March with 59 yeas, 11 nays, and 5 abstentions. A few days later, it was passed by the Utah Senate in a vote of 22 yeas, 6 nays, and 1 abstention. Republican State Senator Curtis Bramble was the sponsor for the Senate version.

“I think it’s a positive change for women and children … At the end of the day, it’s a consumer-protection law,” said Eliason in an interview with the Salt Lake City Tribune.

The bill was not without its opponents, as Planned Parenthood Association of Utah testified against HB 461 and argued that the previous waiting period statute was sufficient.

Karrie Galloway, president and CEO of PPAU, told The Christian Post that the “former waiting period allowed a woman to take all the time she needed to make a decision.”

“With a time sensitive medical procedure, increasing the waiting time was an intrusive, arbitrary hoop for women to navigate,” said Galloway.

“Throughout the process we tried to work with the sponsor to mitigate the intrusiveness of his legislation but he was unwilling.”

Eliason and his supporters believed, however, that the one-day period was not long enough, with Eliason comparing HB 461 to the waiting periods established for cancer treatments and gun purchases.

“The focus of this bill is women having time to consider all of the information that is given to them when facing a life-altering decision that somebody else is making money off of,” said Eliason to the Tribune.

Eliason did not return a request for comment by press time.

According to Deseret News, Utah’s waiting period statute was one of 311 new statutes passed by the 2012 legislature that went into effect on Tuesday.

Neither Planned Parenthood nor the American Civil Liberties Union of Utah have expressed an intention to presently file a lawsuit. However, both organizations have expressed an intention to closely monitor the implementation of the law.

Before Utah’s statute took effect, South Dakota had passed a bill that would have made it the first state to have a 72-hour waiting period. However, a court blocked the measure from taking effect.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/utah-becomes-first-state-to-have-72-hour-waiting-period-for-abortion-74614/

GA bill grand step toward protecting unborn life (OneNewsNow.com)

GA bill grand step toward protecting unborn life (OneNewsNow.com).

PC(USA) honoring right that ‘God doesn’t give us’ (OneNewsNow.com)

PC(USA) honoring right that ‘God doesn’t give us’ (OneNewsNow.com).

‘Paper chase’ veils truth re: abortuary #OneNewsNow.com#

‘Paper chase’ veils truth re: abortuary #OneNewsNow.com#.

Sweet news follows boycott of PepsiCo (OneNewsNow.com)

Sweet news follows boycott of PepsiCo (OneNewsNow.com).

Previous Older Entries