Harvard Poll: 72 Percent Oppose Abortion Beyond 15-Week

I previously wrote about how most Americans are not aligned by the most extreme views of both parties on abortion. Many Democratic leaders have been speaking of absolute abortion rights, as reflected in states like Colorado which recognize the right to abortion until the moment of birth at nine months. Many Republican leaders have been speaking of absolute or near absolute bans on abortion, as reflected in states like Arkansas with only limited exceptions for the life of the mother. Now a Harvard poll reaffirms earlier polling that shows most Americans embrace views closer to Mississippi than Michigan on abortion. Indeed, while Democratic leaders denounced the Mississippi law setting a 15-week limit on abortion, 72 percent of those polled opposed abortion generally after that limit.

A poll conducted after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade found that 72 percent of Americans would allow abortion only until the 15th week of pregnancy or a more restrictive law. That transcends party affiliation. Even 60 percent of Democrats believe abortion should be prohibited after the 15th week or a more restrictive law.

That is also consistent with most other countries. Internationally, only seven countries allow abortion after the 20th week.

Notably, 75 percent of women support the 15-week cut-off or a more restrictive law while 69 percent of men also agree with that timeline.

The poll also shows that 44 percent of voters believe that state legislatures should have the power to determine abortion standards while 25 percent believe Supreme Court justices should decide the issue. Another 31 percent believe that Congress should pass national abortion laws.

This and other polling shows that, while most Americans support a federal right to abortion, they do not support the more liberal position of abortion rights extending beyond 15 weeks. In other words, they hold a position closer to where the concurrence of Chief Justice John Roberts would have left the matter: to uphold Mississippi’s law while preserving Roe v. Wade. That is significantly at odds with the position of the dissenting justices and most of the Democratic leaders, including candidates like Tim Ryan in Ohio in close races.  That may suggest that there is a more nuanced position of voters going into the upcoming midterm elections.

Indeed, the poll may reflect even greater opposition to the sweeping abortion language of Democratic leaders and many pundits. The poll does not show that level of support for the 15-week limit as opposed to a shorter period or more restrictive laws. Indeed, many appear to oppose such an allowance:

 “Do you think your state should allow abortion…?”

Up to 9 months: 10%
Up to 23 weeks: 18%
Up to 15 weeks: 23%
Up to six weeks: 12%
Only in cases of rape and incest: 37%

Those saying that they would allow abortion up to six weeks clearly do not support abortion up to 15 weeks. Likewise, those who would allow abortion only in cases of rape and incest are not endorsing a period of allowable abortion (without such justification) up to 15 weeks. (Conversely, those who would allow abortion for rape or incest may or may not support such a right beyond the 15th week).

The point remains the same. While the media has been overwhelmingly portraying voters as pro-abortion based on the question of whether they would overturn Roe v. Wade, the specific question reflects far greater opposition to abortion, particularly beyond the 15th week.

What is clear is that only 28 percent support abortion for either the full months (10 percent) or up to 23 weeks (18 percent). That is notable because is suggests that Democratic leaders (and states like Colorado) pushing absolute definitions of abortion actually have a small percentage of support for such position.

NB: This blog was edited to reflect more accurately the poll results.

204 thoughts on “Harvard Poll: 72 Percent Oppose Abortion Beyond 15-Week”

  1. I’m skeptical of such polls. Americans make oversimplifying assumptions when asked such survey questions….such as the fetus being healthy and the mother being healthy, and recognizing her pregnancy well before 15 weeks, not a young teen who has been sexually abused, etc. But, when confronted with any of these individual “edge cases”, you’ll get a different answer. You’ll get exceptions. And that is because Americans bring common sense to situations. What they are not good at is conjuring up all that complexity all at once before answering a survey question.

    Also, there is nothing of consequence in answering the question. Psychology researchers like Daniel Kahanen and Amos Tversky have showed that humans will often “change their minds” when something is at stake for them personally in answering a survey question, such as being reward for being correct, or punished for being wrong.

    For these reasons, I take this survey result with a grain of salt.

    1. CMM:

      “Page 40 of the report “Over half of respondents [55%] oppose the Court overturning Roe v Wade”
      Amazing how many trained legal minds they had in that poll. I’m betting most were law professors, too. Fact is you’re talking two different things.Most people can evaluate their own morality and public policy. Like any complex body of work say astophysics, they’re probably not equipped to tease out the nuances of substantive due process, equal protection and rights to privacy.

      But maybe I’m wrong here? Since you agree with the SCOTUS minority, why don’t you trace out the history of substantive due process and explain the Roe decision in that context distinguishing its justification from Ginsburg’s equal protection rationale. I’m all ears.Oh, cutting and pasting not allowed.

  2. The poll also shows that 44 percent of voters believe that state legislatures should have the power to determine abortion standards while 25 percent believe Supreme Court justices should decide the issue. Another 31 percent believe that Congress should pass national abortion laws.

    The 3-legged stool of being a good citizen is based on:
    – civics literacy
    – civics engagement
    – self-reliance

    Those that are not self-reliant have looked to the federal government as the bully they will gladly pay to get what they want. It will take awhile for people to understand the power that has been restored to them during this SCOTUS term. They will have to learn how to be federalist citizens.

    1. I don’t see the link to the poll. Anyone have the link? Relying on someone’s interpretation of the data risks getting more spin than facts…


      The question was: Do you think the Supreme Court decision has settled the law on abortion or has created turmoil?

      Not much of a choice. Of course they didn’t settle the law on abortion. They only ruled on where abortion law should be settled. Did they create turmoil? A root cause analysis would show Roe v Wade and Casey decisions at the root of the turmoil. A much broader and more consequential root cause would be civics illiteracy and dependence on the federal government.

    3. “They will have to learn how to be *federalist* citizens.” (Emphasis added)

      On *this* issue, conservatives use the term “federalism” to mean its exact opposite: a loose coalition of independent states — states that are *not* united by, or bound to, a federal constitution.

  3. Based on democracy, the Harvard Poll makes more sense than the 9 judges on the SC making the decision. Guess what, democracy wins. The 9 judges are no longer making that decision. The states are. Not only that, if someone is late to decide, they can take a train to a state where abortion remains available after their state’s window of opportunity closes. Even those horror cases provided by our local leftists will have their abortions.

  4. “44 percent of voters believe that state legislatures should have the power to determine abortion standards while 25 percent believe Supreme Court justices should decide the issue.” So it seems that the Dobbs decision to send the issue back to the states wasn’t far from what “we the people” want after all. Maybe the extremists in the Democratic party who are calling for the abolition or packing of the court will now shut up and listen to the people for once. The Dems have lost this issue.

  5. I have grown children.
    I do not like the idea of abortion, but I would like to see it remain legal vs some failed med student performing the operation on the back of a van for $200.
    I would support abortion in cases of rape, incest, or if the fetus is non-viable.
    15 weeks, I think that is a reasonable time frame.
    What I am appalled at is the lack of conversation of birth control methods in the first place. Is not the charter of Planned Parenthood to educate, and provide birth control to the community and for free for those who qualify? There are many who speak as if there was no other alternative and without abortion, millions of women in the USA would die of . . . I am not sure. They just keep saying women will die.

    1. Why do you assume that there is a lack of conversation of birth control methods in the first place?

      1. Listening to NPR, there definitely a lack of conversation about birth control, both when it was announced the SC would take up Dobbs v Jackson and in the recent ruling. I listened to several shows, and the lack of conversation about birth control was deafening.

        1. If you do a search on “birth control” at npr.org, it pulls up plenty of discussions.

          More to the point: sex ed classes generally discuss birth control, unless a legislature has stupidly required an abstinence-only curriculum. Parents should discuss birth control with their kids. Ob-Gyn’s discuss birth control with their patients.

    2. Contraceptives fail all of the time. Even tubal ligation and vasectomy. Pregnancy is statistically far more dangerous and carries a far higher risk of death than abortion. History has taught us that when denied a safe abortion, women will take poison or try to self-abort with things like coat hangers or knitting needles. Planned Parenthood DOES everythingyou listed: educate, provide birth control and also well womens’ health services like pap tests, screening for breast cancer and tests for STDs.

      1. “All the time”! We have had access to birth control since the 1960s. Nearly 60 years later we find out contraceptives don’t work! I had vasectomy 35 years ago. I think mine worked. Talk about a snake oil salesman.

        1. There are failure rates for virtually every kind of contraception–vasectomy, tubal ligation, birth control pills, hormone implants, hormone shots, IUDs, diaphragms, condoms, foam and other spermicides, the rhythm method–you name it. The failure rate is dependent on several factors. Birth control can still fail even when someone does everything they can to prevent pregnancy. That’s why insulting women by claiming they are lazy, stupid or careless is misplaced. If your doctor didn’t tell you there was a risk of failure with your vasectomy, then you didn’t get good care.

      2. Natacha,
        I was a young women before Roe was decided, and women weren’t relegated to “take poison or try to self-abort with things like coat hangers or knitting needles”. We had less primary options in those days, and we managed to figure things out. The need to exaggerate negates your position.

        1. Tootsiebug: you should really look into the overall picture of what women used to do when they couldn’t get safe, medical abortion care before accusing me of exaggeration.

          1. Natacha, I AM that young woman, so I’ll look no further than the mirror. That’s no exaggeration.

      3. far more dangerous and carrrs%a far higher risk of death than abortion

        That can’t be right. Abortions are 99.9% fatal.

  6. “ Many Democratic leaders have been speaking of absolute abortion rights, as reflected in states like Colorado which recognize the right to abortion until after birth at nine months.”

    Huh? It’s not abortion AFTER birth. Birth is essentially the end of the pregnancy. There’s no such thing as an abortion after birth. Turley is either being very sloppy in his research or is feeding his rage-aholics on this blog.

    Abortions around the third trimester are very rare. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be an option. Most abortions at that late stage in a pregnancy usually involve a serious health problem gif either the mother or the fetus. There’s more to the simplistic claims anti-abortion supporters make when late term abortions are legal. There ARE very specific medical issues that require it. Big of course most of them don’t care because it’s more important to shove their noses into others private decisions.

    1. It’s more complicated than that. Late-term abortions don’t just involve medical issues. They involve procrastination and denial, lack of financial resources, severe depression and other mental health issues, and state actions to block access to abortion services. It can also involve partner betrayal / infidelity. “Why would I want to chain myself to this poor-excuse for a man for the rest of my life?”

      It’s a complex stew of unenviable situations. Yet, it will just make matters worse for the state to try to overpower women in these clutches.

      “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

      1. Very few abortions occur after 20 weeks, and mostly for reasons related to maternal health or serious fetal anomalies, not the reasons you cite. The reasons you cite certainly play a role in women and girls not getting an abortion right away, but still they generally get the abortion before 20 weeks.

  7. The fetus at 15 weeks: can sense light. If you shine a flashlight against the mother’s tummy, the baby will move away from the light. In the weeks leading up to the 15th, the baby has facial movements, hiccups, kicks, stretches, sucks its thumb, opens and closes its fingers, which have little fingernails. The heart has been beating for 10 weeks, and the brain has been forming for 9 weeks.

    1. Individual rights is not based on thumb-sucking, light sensitivity, or hiccups.

      As is typical, the desire to criminalize abortion is based on the fallacy of ad Misericordiam.

        1. “No, but life is.”

          You have a serious misunderstanding of the meaning and application of “individual rights,” and of what such rights are based on.

          Individual rights is not an issue of when life begins. (All human cells are alive.) It’s an issue of what a “right” is; of what constitutes the violation of a right; of government’s role in protecting individual rights. Rights pertain to an *actual* individual — neither to more (a group) nor less (a fetus).

          There is no such thing as fetus “rights.” And there is no such thing as your “right” to enslave a woman, in the name of compelling her to bring that fetus to term.

          1. “Individual rights is not an issue of when life begins. (All human cells are alive.)”

            Says who?

            All human cells are alive, but only one cell, leads to a human being. Human beings are continuously developing from conception to death. One can make any argument they wish to kill a human being anywhere along that life path, but to state one point as the point to be killed requires more than a simple statement. It necessitates logic and rationality. Merely making a statement does nothing to prove your point.

            1. “One can make any argument they wish to kill a human being anywhere along that life path . . .”

              Only if you conflate a potential and an actual — which anti-abortionists constantly do, to create a straw man and a smear campaign.

              “Merely making a statement does nothing to prove your point.”

              We’ve already had this discussion. A blog comment is not the venue for *proving* anything. Such a proof would require at least a 10,000-word essay — at $2/word (PayPal accepted).

              1. “Only if you conflate a potential and an actual “

                Conflation does not exist in my statement. Conception is bringing life to the union of the sperm and the egg. This is not potentially living. It is actually living and that life cycle starts at conception and ends at death.

                Sam, you need better arguments.

                Your second comment is disingenuous. Again you didn’t have a good argument so I will repeat mine.

                “One can make any argument they wish to kill a human being anywhere along that life path, but to state one point as the point to be killed requires more than a simple statement. It necessitates logic and rationality. Merely making a statement does nothing to prove your point.”

                A logical argument doesn’t require the number of words you claim. contain the number of words you complain about. I will repeat the statement I made that you seem to object to.

                “It necessitates logic and rationality.”

                I didn’t ask for a 10,000-word essay.

    2. Cindy:

      That’s some indicia of life but I think, like Aristotle, that the issue turns on viability. I’m the one who says “an acorn isn’t an oak tree,” but that doesn’t mean grinding every acorn just because you can is the right course, either. I think the mother is in control until viability which is an ever-changing medical standard becuse of new technology. I’m betting we’ll get close to viability upon conception but we’re not there yet. I also think the father, if the couple is married, has an interest after viability and should be able to participate in the decision or else he is relieved from the child support obligation. That only seems fair to me.

      1. There are those & other issues you mention, but what I didn’t see until a few years back is Abortion had been turned into an Industry, that babies pulled from the wombs were being sold off for baby body parts, Stem Cell use & also being used in Satanic Rituals.

        ( Ex VA Gov: We Keep the Baby Comfortable) Until the Bids for it come in….

        Now that Moloch’s Sacrifice & Money have been touched they are as mad as around a Wasp Nest in the summer time.

      2. mespo…….I appreciate your comment and have always respected your opinion. I used to take your position, until I was pregnant with our daughter and felt her moving inside me. (and that was before ultra-sounds, btw)
        There is a political cartoon that I am searching for on the internet as I am writing this. It really expresses my feelings I’ll post it if and when I find it.
        Re: viability…..As a parent, I’ve never understood that argument. A baby outside the womb will not survive unless it’s fed…..and it can’t feed itself. I quit teaching to give our baby the constant attention she needed for survival. That’s why “viability” doesn’t make sense to this old granny. 🙂

        1. Cindy:

          That ol’ granny is pretty sharp. I see your point and don’t diminish for one second your experience over mine. I’m just looking for an island of compromise in a sea of fire.

          1. mespo……Thank you, friend! I know you’re wishing for compromise,,,,It’s hard to achieve now because the Dems kept pushing the envelope, changing the number of acceptable weeks……More was never enough for them.
            Btw, HLM says I’m still not grasping the “viability” used in Roe…and that I’m using a literal definition, not medical definition. But that’s OK. I put him through law school. And if you don’t believe me, I’ve got a Ph.T.* in my pocket, and I’m not afraid to use it!

            *(50 years ago, Baylor Law School awarded the wives of the male law students, a “PhT” degree—–“Putting Hubby Through”. Most of us were school teachers)

    3. Research indicates that the heart isn’t fully formed until ~20 weeks (see, e.g., Pervolaraki, Eleftheria, Richard A. Anderson, Alan P. Benson, Barrie Hayes-Gill, Arun V. Holden, Benjamin JR Moore, Martyn N. Paley, and Henggui Zhang. “Antenatal architecture and activity of the human heart.” Interface focus 3, no. 2 (2013): 20120065). Heart cells begin to beat long before the heart itself is fully formed.

      1. And the frontal lobe of the human brain isn’t fully formed until the age of 10. Maybe you should be demanding abortion on demand up until the child reaches 10. Or, like ex-Gov Northam of Virginia suggests for babies who survive failed abortion attempts , the mother and physician consult and determine whether to end the life. With a 10 year old you can even personally explain to the child why they are being terminated.

        1. “And the frontal lobe of the human brain isn’t fully formed until the age of 10. Maybe you should be demanding abortion on demand up until the child reaches 10.”
          It’s actually 26-years-old. Imagine that debate!

          1. You’re right, of course. My memory failed me. Must be my hippocampus that hasn’t yet fully formed or (more likely) it’s already begun it’s inevitable decline.

  8. I like your column today. Although I am in the prolife camp and would restrict abortion to saving the life of the mother, rape, incest, and a non viable infant, I could accept this law if it came to pass in my state. I would campaign against it but if passed I would go along with it. And to quote that great font of reasonable discourse called “Sammy” above I must be one of those woman murdering republicans. He alludes to pills so I suppose he means bcpills which are safer than ever and forgets there are numerous other options like IUD’s, IUD’s tagged with hormones, condoms, vasectomies, spermicides, tubal ligations. All of which have greater than 98% effectiveness if used properly. Same with bcpills. So I will throw this answer back to Sammy, “Save a life, get a vasectomy”.
    In another vein, Professor, you have frequently mentioned the US AG being somewhat one sided in his pursuit of justice. I note that the Justice Dept is suing the state of Arizona because of a rule requiring voters to prove citizenship. Yet we just saw New York strike down an NYC ordinance that would give aliens the right to vote in local elections. They cited the New York State constitution and State law. I would assume that this would require you to provide proof of citizenship if so challenged yet there has been no lawsuit from the Dept of Justice for this grevious insult and harm to the potential voters of New York.

  9. To be clear, when JT says “most Americans embrace views closer to Mississippi than Michigan on abortion,” Michigan has a pre-Roe ban that took effect after Dobbs. It says “Any person who shall willfully administer to any pregnant woman any medicine, drug, substance or thing whatever, or shall employ any instrument or other means whatever, with intent thereby to procure the miscarriage of any such woman, unless the same shall have been necessary to preserve the life of such woman, shall be guilty of a felony, and in case the death of such pregnant woman be thereby produced, the offense shall be deemed manslaughter.” That is: Michigan bans all abortions with a sole exception to save the mother’s life.

    As for “Internationally, only seven countries allow abortion after the 20th week,” most other developed countries cover the cost of an abortion, so a poor woman does not have to postpone the abortion while she saves up money to cover the abortion, travel, and lost wages taking time off work.

    JT is silent about exceptions: such as the diagnosis with a wanted pregnancy that a fetus has a condition that’s incompatible with life after birth. Some of these diagnoses are not made until later in pregnancy.

  10. “Women will die”
    If I get on a motorcycle, ride at 100 mph and hit a rock in the road, I will die. If a woman/ girl chooses to have unprotected sex, does not feel responsible for creating life in her womb, and waits until the umpteenth week to kill the fetus, she may have complications, although the chances still are very slight. According to WHO, a strong advocate for abortions, in a report released in November 2021, WHO estimated that in developing countries, the deaths caused by unsafe abortions are .0022 of the total, a remarkably small number given that WHO further estimated that in developing countries, 45% of all induced abortions are unsafe. I suspect the biggest complication for many American women/ girls will be between their ears if and when they ever realize the gravity of what they have done. Isn’t this why abortion advocates fought for years to prevent women seeking abortions to view an ultrasound of what is inside them before they make the decision?

    1. We know that there will be an increase in the number of women and girls dying from pregnancy-related complications. That’s a logical consequence of increasing the number of women and girls who are bringing a pregnancy to term because they can’t get an abortion in their state and find it too difficult to travel to another state.

      As you note, unsafe abortions are rare even in low income countries, where a woman is more than twice as likely to die during and following pregnancy and childbirth as she is from an abortion. The ratio is even more extreme in the US, where 700-800 women and girls die annually from pregnancy-related complications compared to a range of 2 to 12 per year dying from abortion complications.

      1. That assumes a static state in which people don’t change their actions to better comport with the legal reality on the ground. Presumably many women will take extra steps to prevent getting pregnant in the first place when the termination of pregnancy becomes more difficult.

        You really have to be living under a rock today to not know:

        A: How one gets pregnant.
        B: how to prevent A from occurring.

        1. You seem out of touch with human nature. Our reproductive behavior is shaped by strong hormonally-driven feelings and behaviors. That is Mother Nature’s plan for species survival. Are you one of these “rationalist” types who naively thinks humans are 100% consciously in control of their behavior? Are you that blind to reality?

          1. I know when I was of high school age I was told there was one rule: “If you get a girl pregnant, don’t bother ever coming home again”. I’m 54 now and interestingly I have never done so accidentally in all those years.

            The thing that separates humans from other animals is that we are capable of exercising reason over impulse.

            “I’m sorry, I couldn’t help myself” doesn’t count as a legal defense, and it doesn’t here either.

          2. Huh? Are you seriously going to go with it’s not her fault because she was horny defense? Using your logic, chastity belts will be making a comeback. What’s next; he pushed her off the subway platform because his testosterone was raging defense?

            1. It would certainly be an interesting, and absurd, rape defense. “You’re honor, you see she was just so hot what choice did I have?”

              This is the kind of perverse logic that puts women in gunny sacks in the Middle East.

        2. No form of birth control is 100% effective, even when used as directed. Both men and women are fallible and so don’t always use it as directed.

          Women and girls continue to be raped. If they could prevent rape, they would. They cannot.

          Women will continue to need abortions with wanted pregnancies that endanger their life or health, or where the baby is diagnosed with a serious anomaly like Trisomy-13.

          You really have to be living under a rock today to not know these things.

          1. Yup. Nothing in the entire planet is 100%.which means there are consequences. or potential consequences to every action. If I go into a casino that was crazy enough to offer a game that the odds were 99% in favor of the player and I lay the deed to my home on the table and that 1% chance the house wins happens, guess what? I’m homeless. It’s a calculated risk. In this case you know what you end up with? Someone like me, a baby that had to be adopted.

            Pretty amazing, an incredibly low probability event results in a childless couple getting what they so desperately wanted. I’m a pretty firm atheist, but it almost makes you wish you believed.

            I’ll buy the 15 week rule, but after that, other than as an intervention to save the mother’s life, there is absolutely zero reason to justify it, regardless of the circumstances that led to it.

          2. You deal in outliers. Do you carry a snow shovel with you to Florida in case it snows?

  11. I tend to believe the poll. I do not personally know anyone that feels abortion should be 100% banned and I do not know anyone that believes a baby should be aborted at full term (infanticide). These are both very extreme positions.

    Most people are reasonable (eg: the Harvard poll). Even my 86 year old church-going mother thinks the “abortion pill” should be widely available. Allowing for early term abortions is the reasonable solution, whether it be done at the state or federal level. If the reasonable people in government could agree (8 weeks,15 weeks, 20 weeks, etc), which is probably unlikely in the current environment, it could be made the law of the land, and the country could move on.

    Of course, the fanatics on both sides would continue to rage, but the vast majority would be relieved.

  12. “Now a Harvard poll reaffirms earlier polling that shows most Americans embrace views closer to Mississippi than Michigan on abortion.”
    That’s a prudent course that takes into account all sides. Of course, to the crazies it’s not enough. Abortion after birth, they’ll demand. The Left is a death cult. Ignore them

    1. Messy,

      “ Abortion after birth, they’ll demand. The Left is a death cult. Ignore them”

      There’s no such thing as “abortion after birth”. Nobody demands that.

      The definition of abortion is to abort to stop a process. A birth is the END of the process that is pregnancy.

      You’ve been playing with the extremists on the right a little too long.

        1. “[Third trimester abortions are] done in cases where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that’s nonviable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

          What part of “a fetus that’s nonviable” do you not understand? The fetus has a condition like total anencephaly that means it will never become viable. It’s going to die after birth no matter what’s done by the medical team.

          I have a DNR. If I’m dying and I stop breathing, I won’t be resuscitated either.

          1. Aninny:

            Leftist Sophistry 101. You can misquote all you like. Governor-Doctor Blockhead here applied the foolish comment advocating infanticide to children born with “severe deformities” AND children who are born “nonviable.” The former got him in more trouble than the latter though both are reprehensible. Margaret Sanger must be a personal hero to you.

          2. “I have a DNR. If I’m dying and”

            You are dying like the anencephalic child, but then I repeat myself.

            The growing healthy child is living and will continue to live unless you decide to kill it.

  13. So? The woman murdering Republicans don’t care what the pills say. As long as women suffer and die for having sex they are happy.

    1. The woman murdering Republicans don’t care what the pills say.

      Well, the woman that is murdering Republicans should care what the penalty is for being convicted of murder.

  14. My question here is for women and women only! This means Norman Bates and the Clown Crew don’t submit your deflection’s. Short of health reasons why would a woman wait that long to abort knowing the pregnancy is unwanted? With all the OTC products available I assume you’ll know long in advance? Just asking ladies.

    1. How long are you talking about?

      Few abortions occur after 20 weeks, and the main reason they occur are because the woman’s life or health are endangered or because the baby is newly diagnosed with a terminal condition. The woman doesn’t have it earlier because she was planning to give birth. But then complications intervened.

      1. Taylor Jones – I suggest you reread my post. I’ve covered the health reasons part.

        1. Margot, how about you give us an example of an actual abortion that some woman had after waiting “that long” but that wasn’t for either maternal or fetal health reasons?

          I can only think of one example, and it was a because of a court battle caused by parents who didn’t want to allow their pregnant preteen to get an abortion, and it took til 7 months before she got a judge’s order allowing her to get the abortion.

          Now your turn, give an actual example of what you’re asking aboout.

          1. Taylor- So what your saying is basically there is NO reason to wait that long (15 weeks). I can’t give you a reason for waiting “that long” to terminate an unwanted pregnancy unless your irresponsible. “Is that what your asking abooooout”?

  15. Music.
    There’s a hole in my rubber..dear Liza dear Liza…
    There’s a hole in my rubber…dear Liza a hole.

    Then fix it dear Turkey…dear Turkey dear Turkey.
    Fix it Turkey your rubbers a joke.

  16. Well if Harvard said it must be right! What BS. Shall we poll about mandatory vasectomies? Professor are you really so ignorant of what is really at issue here? But then why would you care? Women will die.

    1. JH:

      “Well if Harvard said it must be right! ”
      Yeah, Harvard is a bastion of conservatism and Catholic thinking. You’re cute when you’re apoplectic!

  17. Most Americans are both reasonable and tolerant of other beliefs.

    It is only the lefties in Washington, Hollywood, and the media who are intolerant of debate.

    Fortunately we are starting to hear from the centrists, who remain the majority in the country.

    (As an aside, if you read the lefty posts on this blog,you would conclude that liberals are both rabid and stupid.)

    1. You have got to be joking. Have you seen the statements by so called “pro life” supporters? Republicans don’t care what most Americans believe. What medical procedure or medication that only men take is controlled by the government?

      1. hey @guyventner – please point us to the research that substantiates that “FACT” i’d be very curious to dig into that…

Leave a Reply