The ABC poll is horribly flawed ,like most ABC polls. For example: What does "legal in most cases" mean. It has been shown that people being polled tend not to gravitate to extremes, especially when vague choices are supplied. This little slip-in category lets people off the hook in regards to making a firm stance in regard to abortion in a way that does not apply to illegal in most cases. Also, I did not see the demographics on this poll. ABC probably has the worst reputation of over-polling registered Democrats ( as much as 33 to 28). I wonder if that is why the demographics were not supplied.

Yes, my poll is outdated. I would not have clipped had I thought to investigate fu...

The ABC poll is horribly flawed ,like most ABC polls. For example: What does "legal in most cases" mean. It has been shown that people being polled tend not to gravitate to extremes, especially when vague choices are supplied. This little slip-in category lets people off the hook in regards to making a firm stance in regard to abortion in a way that does not apply to illegal in most cases. Also, I did not see the demographics on this poll. ABC probably has the worst reputation of over-polling registered Democrats ( as much as 33 to 28). I wonder if that is why the demographics were not supplied.

Yes, my poll is outdated. I would not have clipped had I thought to investigate further. I was wrapping up to go to bed - what can I say?

Extremists on both the pro-choice and pro-life sides of this issue do not want for it to be settled once and for all - they are making political points and in some cases, cash, for keeping the controversy going.

The solution is clear. (To ME :LOL

We need a constitutional Human Life Amendment. It would legalize abortion before the eighth week of pregnancy, the point at which fetal brain waves have been detected (thereby settling stem-cell and in vitro issues as well) and would prohibit abortions after the 23rd week (a 24 week fetus is able to live outside his mother's body, with intensive care).

You don't want 7 week embryos to be aborted? Then don't abort any. You may FEEL it...

Extremists on both the pro-choice and pro-life sides of this issue do not want for it to be settled once and for all - they are making political points and in some cases, cash, for keeping the controversy going.

The solution is clear. (To ME :LOL

We need a constitutional Human Life Amendment. It would legalize abortion before the eighth week of pregnancy, the point at which fetal brain waves have been detected (thereby settling stem-cell and in vitro issues as well) and would prohibit abortions after the 23rd week (a 24 week fetus is able to live outside his mother's body, with intensive care).

You don't want 7 week embryos to be aborted? Then don't abort any. You may FEEL it's human, but at that point it's a religious issue to most people. An adult with no brain waves can be removed from life support - and so can an embryo.

@willhelm - spin's my middle name, that's why I'm a Democrat, didn't you know?

Kidding aside ...

CrazyRedHead makes some excellent points. To me, one of the reasons why this issue is so thorny is because as much as people on both sides want to pretend it's a black-and-white, all-or-nothing situation, it isn't. You won't find very many Americans who think abortion should never be legal, even in the case where it is the only way to protect the mother's life. In other words, most Americans think abortion should be permitted in some circumstances. Similarly, as much as the pro-life camp doesn't want to believe this, the most vociferous and committed proponents of abortion rights still...

@willhelm - spin's my middle name, that's why I'm a Democrat, didn't you know?

Kidding aside ...

CrazyRedHead makes some excellent points. To me, one of the reasons why this issue is so thorny is because as much as people on both sides want to pretend it's a black-and-white, all-or-nothing situation, it isn't. You won't find very many Americans who think abortion should never be legal, even in the case where it is the only way to protect the mother's life. In other words, most Americans think abortion should be permitted in some circumstances. Similarly, as much as the pro-life camp doesn't want to believe this, the most vociferous and committed proponents of abortion rights still don't feel all that great about abortion, or at least that's my impression. The people who fight hardest to keep abortion legal, even they probably would like to see the incidence of abortion as low as possible. No one likes getting an abortion and no one thinks abortion ought to be used routinely as a form of birth control.

Given that almost everyone believes that abortion should be legal in some (limited) circumstances, and that almost everyone believes that it shouldn't be employed indiscriminately as a form of birth control, then we have several problems.

First is simply the "where do you draw the line" question. When should abortion be OK, and when not?

Second is the "who decides" question. Should the government choose when abortion should be allowable and when it shouldn't?

Third is the distinction between various sources of authority. Should legal decisions be guided by primarily religious values? By someone's interpretation of supposedly scientific information about the state of a fetus at a particular age? Or what? And again, who should decide this?

Because none of these questions has a single clear answer or offers a compelling way of finding a solution that people can agree on, I think we are going to be stuck with this issue for a long time to come.

Thinking about this a little further, I realize I'm not being clear. My point is that there are so many factors that go into an individual decision to undergo an abortion that it's very hard to argue that a one-size-fits-all solution is going to work.

Here are a few examples.

Most people think abortion to save the life of the mother is OK. But how much risk to the mother justifies an abortion? What if the mother has a fifty-fifty chance of surviving? What if she has a five per cent chance? What if her survival is assured but she has a thirty per cent chance of suffering serious, long-term health consequences? How bad should the possible consequences be before they justify an abortion?

O...

Thinking about this a little further, I realize I'm not being clear. My point is that there are so many factors that go into an individual decision to undergo an abortion that it's very hard to argue that a one-size-fits-all solution is going to work.

Here are a few examples.

Most people think abortion to save the life of the mother is OK. But how much risk to the mother justifies an abortion? What if the mother has a fifty-fifty chance of surviving? What if she has a five per cent chance? What if her survival is assured but she has a thirty per cent chance of suffering serious, long-term health consequences? How bad should the possible consequences be before they justify an abortion?

Or, take CrazyRedHead's solution: no abortions past seven weeks. Fine. What if the first-trimester screen at twelve weeks reveals a genetic abnormality that makes it 95% likely that the fetus will not survive until childbirth, no matter what medical interventions are undertaken? Should the woman be legally forced to continue the pregnancy? What if the child has a reasonable chance of being born alive -- but, if he is, he is certain to have a severe handicap and unlikely to live beyond a year?

Or take rape. Most people are willing to concede that a woman ought not to be legally required to carry a pregnancy to term that was a result of having been raped. But what if she claims to have been raped but no rapist was ever convicted? Does that still count?

Anyhow, I could go on and on. My point isn't that abortions should be performed in each of these situations. Rather, my point is that we need to think about whether the government ought to be deciding what to do in each case I've mentioned. Do you really trust Congress and the courts to make the best decision in each one of the cases I've described? Or should that sort of momentous, life-altering decision be left to the individual, her family, and her medical advisers to make? I vote for the latter.