Please Take My One-Question Poll on Choice (Abortion)

[catzies]

Dear DUers,

I have read most of the many threads on the issue of abortion. Please take all your thoughts and feelings into consideration and answer the following question:

Given your stance on the issue of abortion, do you/would you work to make abortion illegal, including voting for candidates who will do that?

[Bunny]

1. Out of curiousity, why are you doing this?

Just asking...

[catzies]

5. Because I don't see this question answered in any other thread

I already have seen a great deal on who is and who isn't pro-choice around here and I want to know out of those people those who are actively seeking its elimination.

[Bunny]

8. Do you think that, on a site called

Democratic Underground, you'll get a lot of people saying that they are actively seeking to eliminate the right to choose?

On edit - I am not trying to bust your chops, I just think that maybe your poll could be worded differently to better reflect your intentions.

[catzies]

10. Well, there is one yes vote. That's what I wanted to know.

There have been many many personal stories and anecdotes on the subject.

I just wanted to know, when push comes to shove, where people take their stand.

I personally can't STAND the "I'm pro-choice, BUT..." position, when someone then goes on to rail for/against parental notification, outlawing specific procedures, waiting periods, etc. etc. etc. so I want to know where those people are when it comes to bottom-lining it, yes/no, "final answer."

[Tina H]

2. Roe v Wade says . . .

is a decision that says some abortions must be legal, while other abortions made be made illegal by the states, if they so choose. So I guess that Roe v wade supporters (like Candidate Kerry) would vote "other" in your poll.

I, of course (being a woman), think that Roe v Wade should be expanded so that abortion is *always* legal, not just sometimes.


On edit: the post also implicitly seems to assume that abortion would be one's primary determining factor in deciding who to vote for. This is simply not true for many people who vote based primarily on other issues.

[catzies]

6. I didnt' bring up Roe V Wade for a specific reason

Efforts to overturn it outright have not been successful,but efforts at chipping away at it have been.

What good is Roe v Wade anyway if:

1) training on proceudres isn't done in some medical schools out of pressure - not to mention doctors can get killed in various places.

2) there is no access to it in many large areas of the country.

[Tina H]

9. What I was diving at . . .

is that your poll reduced a complex question, with lots of factual variations, to a yes/no/other question. I criticize this as an oversimplification.

It sounds like you may not have read Roe v Wade in that you have the impression that new laws are chipping away at it. This is not really the case. Roe v Wade has always contemplated that *some* abortions would be regulated and *some* even illegal. This is not subsequent courts chipping at R v W -- rather, this is waht Roe v Wade actually says!

Anyone who supports Roe v Wade ought to put themselves in the other category, but really, adherents to mainstream political positions should not be relegated to the "other" bin in a well-drawn poll.

As far as access to abortion: The US, proportionately, has more abortions than other first world countries. If you think the access problems are bad here, then imagine how bad France or Japan must be!

[catzies]

12. My purpose WAS to oversimplify it. All the nuances discussed already.

No, I have not read the text of the decision Roe v Wade so I can't comment on what you said.

I'm inferring that when you said, "*some* abortions would be regulated and *some* even illegal," you are talking about specific procedures used. Is that correct?

[Tina H]

16. Clarification on Roe v Wade

To explain Roe v Wade in a slightly simplified way:

States are given the choice about how to make their abortion law (this was not a change for earlier laws). States can have no abortion laws or regs. alternatively, a state might choose to burden abortion with many laws and regs

However, R v W did make new law by saying that states cannot make all abortion illegal, even if that is what a state wants to do. Roe v Wade explains that some abortions may be made illegal, and gives standards for a state to follow when illegalizing abortions.

the standards do not relate to the medical details of respective surgical procedures. Rather, the standards are basically these:

- can't illegalize abortions for less than 6 month z/e/f.

- when illegalizing abortions for 6 + month z/e/f, there must be an exception for the health of the preganant woman.

So, like I have been saying: in your poll, R v W is "other," rather than "no."

As far as your poll being misleading: when I started this post, there were like 68 "no" votes and zero "other" votes. However, I find it improbable that none of these people support Roe v Wade. Accordingly, there should be some votes in the "other" category. However, the people's will is not reflected because of the way the poll is constructed.

Your poll has reduced a complex issue to yes / no, and (predictably) nobody wants to stand up and be counted as other, regardless of how strongly they support Roe v Wade. Therefore, I think the poll results are misleading.

Finally, here is a link to the Roe v Wade decision for your benefit and more nuanced consideration of the issues:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=410&invol=113

[catzies]

18. Thank you for attention to detail

I absolutely intended it to be oversimplified, yes/no. I'm tired of nuance. It's been discussed to death.

In my perfect world, I'd like to see the issue of choice solved once and for all so we can move on to other things.

It's a battle I'm tired of fighting, but we can't stop or they'll win. But while we're busy fighting this fight with all of our enegry and all of our resources, other issues suffer.

That's part of their intent, keeping us preoccupied with this. We can't go forward, we can't go backward, we're effectively paralyzed.

[Tina H]

20. That is all fine

But a misleading poll does not help. If your "other" choice had been labelled "Roe v Wade" instead, I think it would have more than zero votes (out of 79) by now.

Being tired of the nuances of a complex issue is understandable, although I am not personally tired of discussing nuances of abortion law.

It sounds like your poll should have asked: "Are you sick and tired of discussing abortion issues and do you want to leave the nuances of this law to people who actually care (like Judge Blackmun)?"

This question is more realistically susceptible to a yes / no / other vote format.

[hlthe2b]

3. How is this poll at all applicable to anyone other than those who

are anti-choice? I don't understand what relevance it would have otherwise. Clearly no one that is Pro-Choice is going to work to make abortion illegal. How would you expect them to vote? (I would think "not applicable," but that is not one of the choices).


Afraid that I am totally baffled.....

[Bunny]

4. I join you in being baffled.

I don't quite get it...

[catzies]

7. Because people who are against it for themselves or their loved ones

may or may not choose to make certain that no one else has the right to because of their personal beliefs.

I just want to know, that's all.

[hlthe2b]

14. Catzies...

One can certainly be personally anti-abortion and be either Pro-CHoice or Anti-Choice. If one had no personal convictions whatsoever against abortion, it is hard to believe that they would be anything but Pro-Choice. (Can you imagine anyone that has no problem whatsoever with abortion wanting laws to outlaw it? Can you point to any example where people have no convictions against the issue (e.g.,cigarettes, drinking, marijauna, but would actively work to outlaw it?)

Thus, the question boils down to those who are Pro-Choice versus Anti-Choice. Now, Anti-Choice individuals may or may not have it as a significant enough issue that they would vote against a Pro-Choice candidate or actively try to work towards outlawing, I suppose and they might answer this poll in revealing ways. But, I have a hard time imagining any way in which a Pro-Choice individual would want to outlaw it--that would be the ultimate contradiction. Thus, to me, this poll makes no sense whatsoever, unless you ask only those who oppose abortion/choice to answer it. Even then, there are so few anti-choice people on DU (with the exception of the occasional lurking conservative) that I just don't know who you hope to answer. Perhaps posting this poll on a conservative forum would make more sense?

[catzies]

17. Everyone on all the threads about give such long answers...

You have two short statements in your post that crystallize what I'm trying to get to here:

One can certainly be personally anti-abortion and be either Pro-CHoice or Anti-Choice.

Yes. So given that,

Thus, the question boils down to those who are Pro-Choice versus Anti-Choice

EXACTLY.

[hlthe2b]

19. I think several here (myself included) are just trying to help you

clarify your issue so that you can post a poll that even begins to answer what you think it is. Even though polls here are just for fun, given the minimal responses you get and the very limited "audience," still they are absolutely meaningless if you don't ask in a way that can allow others to identify an answer that is both accurate and appropriate in conveying their intent.

What you really want to ask, (I think, at least) is: IF you do NOT consider yourself to be Pro-Choice (i.e., answer ONLY if you are Anti-Choice please), do you/would you work to make abortion illegal, including voting for candidates who will do that?


Btw, designing polls is actually quite an art, but the first step with one that tries to simplify a complex issue is to define the one question you want answered and to ask it only of that group to which it applies. I think you really wanted to ask several questions in one poll, but that is where you get into problems... (Not meaning to offend you, just to try to help you out a bit.)

[catzies]

21. You are very kind and I am grateful

You're right, designing polls is an art and I'm no good at it.

"Anti-abortion" and "anti-choice" are different. There is no "pro-abortion" the way I see it.

I wanted to know if anti-abortion people are still pro-choice.

[hlthe2b]

22. Ahh, ok... now that is yet another question...

One then might ask that

If you consider yourself to be personally anti-abortion (if you consider yourself to be against abortion for yourself or family), do you believe that women should have the choice to obtain a legal abortion?
yes
no

[cheezus]

11. I would like to EFFECTIVELY reduce or eliminate abortion

Marijuana is illegal... that means there aren't any kids smoking it, right?


Taking the right to choose away will do is result in more unwanted pregnancies and more coat hanger abortions. If we want to solve this problem we need real, truthful sex education (the kind that works, none of the abstinence only nonsense). We also need to have a high availability of birth control, condoms, and emergency contraceptives in ALL areas (including (especially?), poor areas).

Besides, do you want the government having control over reproduction? How long until the population is high enough, and you can only have 2 kids (maybe even 1!)... or we're in perpetual war, so the government mandates that 2/3 children born must be male. No thanks, reproduction is a liberty that we shouldn't be screaming to give away.

[HuskerDem]

13. HELL NO - exactly the opposite

I will never vote for an anti-choice candidate. Ever.

[JNelson6563]

15. Let them legislate their religious superstition

Elsewhere.

[Th1onein]

23. I voted other.

I believe that abortion should be illegal. I believe that it is the murder of another human being. Having said that, however, abortion is just one issue and I cannot base my vote on one issue, alone. There is more than one way to murder a human being, and I think that the Republicans are murdering human beings in many different ways. And I have never, nor will I EVER, vote for a Republican. Period.

[catzies]

26. "Other" not meant to mean one is a single-issue voter.

You are obviously a YES on my poll.

[Th1onein]

30. Nope. I will NEVER vote for a Republican. Can I make that any clearer?

eom

[WillyT]

24. Not Only NO, But HELL NO !!!

NO!

[libhill]

25. No -

While this may seem contradictory, my philosophy is simple: while I don`t necessarily agree with abortions, I still believe firmly that a woman has a right to choose what to do with her own life and body, regardless of what I, or anyone thinks or believes.

[bingoboingo]

27. Not to be antagonistic

If Kerry believes that "Life begins at conception" as he stated, then doesn't it logically follow that he would also believe that killing an unborn "life" is wrong?

If not, why?

[bingoboingo]

28. Someone want to answer this?

Please!

[libhill]

34. Because

He`s a politician - look at the big picture, the important thing right now is getting rid of Bush and the Repukes.

[geniph]

29. Regardless of my personal feelings on abortion

(which are that it's a VERY PERSONAL matter), the fact is that outlawing abortions does NOT stop abortion. Let me repeat that:

OUTLAWING ABORTIONS DOES NOT STOP ABORTIONS

Women have been deliberately terminating unwanted pregnancies since before they figured out what was causing them. They always have. They always will. The only question is what method will be used - herbs, arsenic, coathangers, or a sterile clinical D&C. Do we really want to kill BOTH of them, not just the fertilized ovum, as some sort of penalty for having conceived?

[bingoboingo]

31. Because people will do it anyway...

We shouldn't outlaw it?

People will murder other people regardless of the laws as well. Should that be legal?

I'm not trying to flame you, just don't understand the logic.

[geniph]

32. That's a strawman argument

It's futile and it's unnecessary to legislate against abortion. It's like legislating against gravity. There are good, necessary reasons to legislate against murder. I don't regard it as a valid comparison - and legislating against abortion is a slippery slope toward outlawing contraception and criminalizing miscarriage.

Mother Nature terminates more than 25% of pregnancies. Pregnancy is not, and never will be, a guarantee of live birth.

[Cheswick2.0]

35. ooops, too dumb to post

[bigwillq]

33. I'm a strong believer in the right to choose

No matter what the issue is.

As far as abortion is concerned, I am pro-choice.

As a male, I don't think I have the right to tell a women what to do with her body.

And I don't think, the two G's (God and government) have the right either.

[JohnLocke]

36. Where's the HELL NO! option?

[kerry-is-my-prez]

37. Hell no! My number #1 issue.

n/t