I come up with 16% . . . but then again, perhaps math is just hard for both of us.
I think the numbers in Cooke’s link suggested 2% that didn’t know. I think that’s the difference.
1 Like
Your example is reasonable to me.
I was thinking that out of 100 people, 36 say abortion should be legal “in only a few circumstances”. But, it appears that for half of those 36, “anytime in the first three months” is okay. (69-51)
I think the message here is that phrases like “only a few circumstances” are sufficiently vague that they don’t give a lot of information on what laws would be acceptable.
1 Like
Yes. You need to look at the specific circumstances in the actual Gallup Poll questions to get a good picture of peoples’ feelings on the subject. The headline 69% support for abortion by itself doesn’t give much insight on what specific measures might be acceptable in a piece of legislation. There is clearly much support for first trimester abortions but there are still some restrictions that folks would want to see for a clear majority of the population to support it.
Or for my “daughter” and not “your daughter”.
1 Like
Not going to dig up a link, but Iowa had a special 1 day legislative session yesterday just to pass a 6-week abortion ban. With rape exception, but it requires the rape to be reported to police within 45 days. Polls suggest that 60% of Iowans are opposed to the bill.
I don’t understand why 6 week bans are the current Republican norm instead of total bans. A 6-week ban is effectively a total ban, as many women don’t know that they are pregnant at 6 weeks (the 6 weeks counts from last period, so conception doesn’t even occur until week 2-3). Is there a meaningful core of voters who would support a 6-week ban but not a total ban?
I think it stems from the BS “heartbeat” argument. It also allows them to say, “it’s not a total ban”.
6-week ban doesn’t sound as extreme as a total ban. I think that’s also around when the heartbeat is detectable using the highest end equipment possible.
Nitpick:
You need to delete the word “missed”. Gestational age counts from the last actual period. It’s self-reported so a woman who was close to the 6-week mark could always lie. I don’t know at what point someone would call her out and say “bullshit, you’ve obviously been pregnant longer than that”.
Thanks for the edit, still working on my coffee.
A six week ban avoids arguments over whether various forms of birth control might be abortifacients.
4 Likes
In addition to this law, the Iowa legislature passed a resolution for a amendment to the state constitution saying that “this Constitution does not recognize, grant, or secure a
right to abortion or require the public funding of abortion” in 2021.
Note that it doesn’t outlaw abortions. The background is that earlier abortion bills had been blocked by an Iowa Supreme Court ruling that was similar to Roe. So, even after Dobbs, that ruling was still in effect.
Just like the national politics, IA Republicans have been pushing to get anti-abortion people on the court. They seem to have succeeded, but the amendment still seems like a good chance for Rs to settle the constitutional question “permanently”.
The process is that the same resolution needs to be passed again, then it goes to a referendum where a simple majority wins. According to the ACLU, there is a good chance they get a referendum vote sometime in 2024.
If the polls are right, I don’t think the Rs really want to put any abortion law, even this very modest one, on the ballot in 2024. They could have passed it in their regular 2023 session, or in this special section. I’m curious how they decide to play this next year.
Republicans want some way to discreetly protect against their indiscretions?
More seriously…
First – I’m not a Republican or an apologist for Republicans. I’m a socially-liberal, small-ell libertarian.
Second – Although I have strong moral objections to abortions that are not indicated for health reasons (including both physical and mental health), I have equally strong philosophical/political objections to the idea that legislators and courts intervening in making the determination for when an abortion is or isn’t appropriate. Nothing that I’m about to write should be taken as my being anti-choice, and I am not seeking to impose moral condemnation on anyone from my armchair. That’s way beyond my paygrade, and generally none of my business.
Perhaps hypocritically, I don’t have any moral objections to the use of Plan B. And when it comes to abortion-by-medication…well, I’ve struggled with trying to reconcile my moral objections to some abortions with my lack of moral objection to Plan B or pharmacological methods of contraception. At what point does it become immoral to take a couple of pills?
While I disagree with the reasoning behind the “fetal heartbeat” standard, I can see where some anti-choice folks would glom onto that standard as a way to reconcile analogous internal debates they might have on the subject.
1 Like
I thought there was some objective test done with ultrasound or similar.
Like maybe if a “heartbeat” is detected then it is too late.
I don’t think that’s hypocritical at all. Most of us object to killing innocent people. Most of us don’t object to killing a few cells. Somewhere between when an egg matures and when a baby is born, that egg becomes close enough to “innocent person” that we feel it deserves protection. What point in development feels “close enough to a person” varies from person to person.
The bright lines are in the wrong place for many of us. Bright lines:
Egg matures
Egg is fertilized
Primitive stripe forms (this is when it stops having the potential to be identical twins, and is on the path to become a single individual)
Attachment to uterus (this is the start of “pregnancy” in a very meaningful sense)
Heartbeat
Brain waves
Viable outside the womb (less “hard” a line, but extremely meaningful)
Birth
Draws first breath
So a lot of people pick a point that’s not exactly a bright line, and might pick different points depending on the circumstances.
1 Like
Oh, please. They know this won’t be enforced on them. Abortions for me, not for thee!
Basic, “Nope, it’s been five weeks (passes some campaign funds). Please abort my daughter’s um, indiscretion.”
I don’t know about that specific legislation. If it’s defined by gestational age though, that is self-reported.
Ohio made news with their “heartbeat bill”, which I presume is defined by whether a heartbeat is detected.
If it’s called a “6 week ban” I’d assume it’s gestational age.
I might be wrong. But if I am, that’s confusing terminology IMO.
State representative can send their daughters to NY if need be.
In a few states, they’re trying to criminalize encouraging someone to get an abortion, or helping them travel to someplace where abortion services can be accessed.
Or “take a grand tour of the Continent, perhaps 6 weeks or so”.