According to recent polls by Pew Research, 51% of Americans believe that abortion should be legal under most circumstances while 43% believe that it should be illegal. (Gallop puts this at 47% to 46%) Even in the South, where poor educational systems, autocratic forms of religious institutions, and massive amounts of money have conspired to misinform the public about such issues, more than 40% (according to Pew) still believe it should be legal in most cases. This seems straightforward enough, but doesn't really begin to touch on the complexity of the situation and beliefs of the electorate. Indeed, in many places in the South, the word ABORTION, alone is considered offensive and evil. But if the questionnaire is reworded a bit, very different numbers begin to show up.
For instance, very large numbers of people are opposed to late term abortions, while the numbers soften considerably for the morning after pill. According to Gallop, this more “moderate” view shows that 50% prefer abortion to be legal under most circumstances — carving out only a few situations in which it should not be allowed, while 28% believe it should be legal under any circumstance, and 21% illegal under any circumstance. Just under 20% of voters will chose a candidate that shares their particular conviction only. Curiously, these numbers fluctuate only within a margin of +/- 5% historically dating back to 1976. Whereas, the Prolife vs. Prochoice only form of the poll shows significantly larger margins of swing (+/- 11% or so). It is also important to note that the largest swings occur during elections where the most propaganda is being generated.
Another curiosity is the level of mis-information that exists about abortion. Though this shouldn't be surprising in an era of Fox News, there still exist many incorrect ideas about abortion and its impact on the physical and mental health of the woman receiving it. A very good example is conflation — that mental illness and excessive mental stress is associated with the very early term termination of pregnancy. While it is associated with hormonal changes in some people as well as cultural and societal feedback for others, the use of morning after pills and early termination of zygote development is more often tied to depression if some causal relation link can be found such as if the person wanted the child to begin with. There exists little if any evidence that extreme states of depression (at this stage of pregnancy termination) can be uncorrelated with social pressures and tied directly to the procedure. Now it is true that there are a number of studies — some of early term abortion and some of late term abortion, that suggest that as high as 30% of abortion recipients may experience some form of severe depression or mental anxiety. These studies have been high touted by the Prolife groups (see for instance Lifenews), the authors of the studies themselves are careful to point out that there are many factors that could not be controlled for, like the support network of the family and local community. Moreover, they have found that occurrences of depression and anxiety correlate strongly with the term of the abortion — and thus with the degree of social acceptability of the abortion. Naturally, I am talking statistics here, individuals may experience a wide range of emotions over any decision they make that is life altering. But the point is that information on the effects of the process is incomplete and can be extremely misleading.
When discussed further with the respondents to questionnaires, it becomes clear that a large percentage (49% according to Gallup) see abortion as morally wrong. But even this morality has its nuances. These numbers again fall considerably when we are talking about something that is harder to anthropomorphize. When a pill is involved, or a very simple procedure within the first few weeks, the numbers come closer to those of evangelicals (who oppose abortion in all cases in the largest numbers) — around 30%.
So the picture is a complicated one. It starts with a group of cells that to many people — in fact I would say to MOST people - belongs to the woman. She may do with it as she pleases. Though there is a small caveat — “abortion shouldn't be used as a form of birth control” is a common refrain in the South. But I would maintain, this is societal pressure (stated another way is that women should not have too many partners, or too much sex). Given the male dominated view of the world we live in, it can be understood as a control mechanism — after all if their her cells, who cares? But as time passes, and development occurs, moral implications become a greater and greater part of the what the average American mind perceives. This is of course modulated by religious cultures and traditions. At some point, which is undetermined in the mind of most Americans, it becomes a human life capable of self sustained existence. Here, the average American has a problem with terminating the pregnancy. As an aside, this argues strongly for INCREASING the availability of early term procedures as well as support mechanisms for the women that have them. Recent state statutes to limit such access have exactly the opposite effect on the population, forcing the abortion into later terms when the moral implications are higher in the electorates mind.
My point is however, that this is clearly a nuanced view — not black and white. Abortion is neither good or bad unless one can state assuredly when that unique point has occurred in each case: which is generally pretty difficult. Both of our democratic candidates have addressed this and seem to have an understanding of the ramifications. Both Bernie and Hillary have expressed views that recognize that not all questions have a yes / no ending to them and that determination of what is right and wrong (as the American voter would have it) isn't clear. But that doesn't invalidate the question or the reasoning that leads you there. The republicans on the other hand, express absolutes. “It is wrong in every case.” With the exception of about 20% of Americans, this is an absurdity. OK, Kasich doesn't say to this way, but has enacted laws that do. They, in short, do not expound a view that is held by the vast majority of Americans, and yet they will receive votes as though they do! Again, nearly 20% of our population will vote based on whether or not that candidate holds the view in the simple questionnaire “is it right: yes/no?” This will be done on moral dimensions that very few actually hold. Indeed, from the record it would seem that many of the legislators that champion this morality do not actually believe it either.
This is interesting because today I had a “debate” with a “prolifer” that will support a candidate that holds his particular view. But after a little conversation we found that indeed we were not so far apart. In fact, my opinions were much closer to his than say Cruz. Yet, I support Hillary (for today but tomorrow I could just as easily support Bernie). He, like I, do not want to see this type of government engineering of society — and yet his choice of candidate will certainly work hard to make Roe vs Wade go away. He, like I do not accept a set of morals that see things as wholly good or wholly bad. In fact, I did take the time to suggest to him that the perspective of militant prolife is not supported by Christian or Judaic traditions. Recall that the Law does give the circumstances under which an abortion should be performed.
Of course, I have presented my case not in terms of who is right and who is wrong on this matter, but rather what a democracy would do in the circumstance — that is, what the collective wisdom of the voters might have to say about it. And, this brings me to my thesis: 1) conversation can still be used as an important tool to win people over — even single issue voters. 2) Vote blue no matter who, because of we don't it will not just be us that suffers through the disaster, but also many of those that didn't bother to look at the real differences in the candidates.
Branding and labeling has dramatically undercut the will and understanding of the collective. For those of you who still believe in the wisdom of crowds, the efforts of the prolife movement has been to breakdown this collective wisdom through misinformation, cross-talk, and conflation (the deadly sins of information theory). It is important to realize that many or most of those low information — single issue voters will not get what they think they will get on this issue if they vote for a Cruz or a Trump or a Kasich.