Science > Abortion > Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies Being Chopped Up Like Salami!
| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Raymond Luxury-Yacht II" |
| Date: |
02 Jul 2003 09:23:05 AM |
| Object: |
Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies Being Chopped Up Like Salami! |
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030701-115636-9509r.htm
The balance between pro-choice women and women who say abortion should
be outlawed or severely restricted is shifting toward the pro-life
side, bumping that group into the majority in the debate over
reproductive rights, according to a new national poll.
Fifty-one percent of women surveyed by the Center for the
Advancement of Women said the government should prohibit abortion or
limit it to extreme cases, such as rape, incest, or life-threatening
complications.
The findings, with a 3 percent margin of error for the 1,000 women
surveyed, tips the scale from the last sampling in 2001, when 45
percent of women sided against making abortion readily available or
imposing only mild restrictions. Only 30 percent support making it
generally available, down from 34 percent in 2001, the survey found.
<click on link for more>
Many are tired of babies being chopped up like luncheon meat by greedy
doctors.
.
|
|
| User: "William David Thweatt" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies |
11 Jul 2003 02:55:02 PM |
|
|
LadySycamore (neveryoumind@crap.com) wrote:
: Stephen wrote:
: > The major point is that 51% of women don't agree with the pro-choice stance.
: OF ONLY THOSE WOMEN POLLED, NOT OF ALL WOMEN IN THE COUNTRY!
Take a Midol, and stop yelling.
--
--
William "Dave" Thweatt
Robert E. Welsh Postdoctoral Fellow
Chemistry Department
Rice University
Houston, TX
thweatt@ruf.rice.edu
dave.thweatt@us.army.mil
.
|
|
|
| User: "William David Thweatt" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies |
14 Jul 2003 11:10:10 AM |
|
|
LadySycamore (neveryoumind@crap.com) wrote:
: William David Thweatt wrote:
: > LadySycamore (neveryoumind@crap.com) wrote:
: > : Stephen wrote:
: > : > The major point is that 51% of women don't agree with the pro-choice stance.
: >
: > : OF ONLY THOSE WOMEN POLLED, NOT OF ALL WOMEN IN THE COUNTRY!
: >
: > Take a Midol, and stop yelling.
: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
: prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
: speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
: assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
: NOW *****.
What is your point? We can all read the 1st Amendment. What has the 1st
Amendment to do with sampling practices of pollsters other than they can
publish their results without being censored by the government?
BTW, take another Midol.
--
--
William "Dave" Thweatt
Robert E. Welsh Postdoctoral Fellow
Chemistry Department
Rice University
Houston, TX
thweatt@ruf.rice.edu
dave.thweatt@us.army.mil
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies BeingChopped Up Like Salami! |
03 Jul 2003 02:30:04 PM |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
"Pat Winstanley" <ng_wisy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.196e02c82fd6dc1798a3a9@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <3f036571_2@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>, says...
"Patrick Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkadbwg80o.fsf@eris.io.com...
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@citlink.net> writes:
Raymond Luxury-Yacht II wrote:
Fifty-one percent of...1,000 women surveyed...
Stop the presses! A little over 500 women don't approve of abortion!
I anxiously anticipate the special session of congress that will
surely
be held to address the wishes of those 501 women.
Polls are useless.
Note that this poll is being trumpeted by the Washington Times -- the
Moonie
paper. I'm surprised they only found 51% in agreement with their
wishes --
it's usually skewed a lot more than that.
--PLH, "Reverend" Moon needs to change but one letter for a much more
accurate
name
So everyone's a statistical expert now?! If you actually READ what it
says:
1) that it was sponsored by a pro-choice group (suggesting that the
sample
would be reasonably random)
2) that the result was significant to p<0.03 i.e. 3% error margin (more
than
adequate)
you would realise that it's of some note, and could semi-reasonably be
applied to a much wider group. But no, everyone's a smart ***** and only
"A
little over 500 women don't approve of abortion"...
If you read the actual results 81% said abortion should be available
(varying from generally, stricter than now, to only rape/incest/life of
woman etc). Of that
17% said it shouldn't be permitted at all.
(2% don't know)
The major point is that 51% of women don't agree with the pro-choice stance.
:-p
51% *of those polled*. Nothing more.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Stephen" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies Being Chopped Up Like Salami! |
04 Jul 2003 11:59:53 AM |
|
|
"Pat Winstanley" <ng_wisy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.196e97f56320794898a3bf@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <3F048464.8487E4B@citlink.net>, says...
Stephen wrote:
"Pat Winstanley" <ng_wisy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.196e02c82fd6dc1798a3a9@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <3f036571_2@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>,
says...
"Patrick Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkadbwg80o.fsf@eris.io.com...
Frank Dwyer < > writes:
Raymond Luxury-Yacht II wrote:
Fifty-one percent of...1,000 women surveyed...
Stop the presses! A little over 500 women don't approve of
abortion!
I anxiously anticipate the special session of congress that
will
surely
be held to address the wishes of those 501 women.
Polls are useless.
Note that this poll is being trumpeted by the Washington
Times -- the
Moonie
paper. I'm surprised they only found 51% in agreement with
their
wishes --
it's usually skewed a lot more than that.
--PLH, "Reverend" Moon needs to change but one letter for a much
more
accurate
name
So everyone's a statistical expert now?! If you actually READ what
it
says:
1) that it was sponsored by a pro-choice group (suggesting that
the
sample
would be reasonably random)
2) that the result was significant to p<0.03 i.e. 3% error margin
(more
than
adequate)
you would realise that it's of some note, and could
semi-reasonably be
applied to a much wider group. But no, everyone's a smart ***** and
only
"A
little over 500 women don't approve of abortion"...
If you read the actual results 81% said abortion should be available
(varying from generally, stricter than now, to only rape/incest/life
of
woman etc). Of that
17% said it shouldn't be permitted at all.
(2% don't know)
The major point is that 51% of women don't agree with the pro-choice
stance.
:-p
51% *of those polled*. Nothing more.
It didn't even do that.
About 80%+ of the women in that survey approved of abortion being
legally available as an option in various circumstances. IE. About 80%+
of the women surveyed were pro-choice.
Less than 20% of those polled said their should be no legal choice
between aborting and continuing a pregnancy.
Read it yourself!
I did, and it says that only 30% said it should be generally available -
thus supporting the pro-choice stance. The other percentage of women polled
thought that the availability should be tightened, thus removing a degree of
choice from the equation.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Stephen" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies Being Chopped Up Like Salami! |
05 Jul 2003 07:41:21 AM |
|
|
"Pat Winstanley" <ng_wisy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1970141dc425087098a3cf@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <3f05b36a_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>, says...
The major point is that 51% of women don't agree with the
pro-choice
stance.
:-p
51% *of those polled*. Nothing more.
It didn't even do that.
About 80%+ of the women in that survey approved of abortion being
legally available as an option in various circumstances. IE. About
80%+
of the women surveyed were pro-choice.
Less than 20% of those polled said their should be no legal choice
between aborting and continuing a pregnancy.
Read it yourself!
I did, and it says that only 30% said it should be generally available -
thus supporting the pro-choice stance. The other percentage of women
polled
thought that the availability should be tightened, thus removing a
degree of
choice from the equation.
Dear Stephen... you clearly don't know what "pro-choice" means.
In favour of a free choice surely? Thus meaning that 68% (excluding the 2%
of "don't know"'s) believe that a free choice on abortion is wrong. If my
definition of "pro-choice" doesn't meet with your approval then feel free to
correct me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Julian D." |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies Being Chopped Up Like Salami! |
05 Jul 2003 04:45:17 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 5 Jul 2003 17:58:52 +0100, Pat Winstanley
<ng_wisy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
In article <3f06c853_2@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>, says...
"Pat Winstanley" <ng_wisy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1970141dc425087098a3cf@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
In article <3f05b36a_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>, says...
The major point is that 51% of women don't agree with the
pro-choice
stance.
:-p
51% *of those polled*. Nothing more.
It didn't even do that.
About 80%+ of the women in that survey approved of abortion being
legally available as an option in various circumstances. IE. About
80%+
of the women surveyed were pro-choice.
Less than 20% of those polled said their should be no legal choice
between aborting and continuing a pregnancy.
Read it yourself!
I did, and it says that only 30% said it should be generally available -
thus supporting the pro-choice stance. The other percentage of women
polled
thought that the availability should be tightened, thus removing a
degree of
choice from the equation.
Dear Stephen... you clearly don't know what "pro-choice" means.
In favour of a free choice surely?
Within reasonable limits such as having to have an abortion (if that is
chosen) performed by medically qualified people in a safe medical
establishment, and within time limits.
There is nothing in the pro-choice stance that states there shouldn't be
*any* regulations stating when/how/why the choice may be exercised. And
the laws reflect this.
The only time a pregnant person has an entirely free choice regarding
whether or not to continue their pregnancy is during the first trimester
(which means they have a window of about six to eight weeks on average
by the time the pregnancy is discovered and they have made the necessary
arrangements). And even then they cannot have a legal termination if
they can't finance the medical fees.
How much MORE tight do people want to make it?
For now, tight enough so a woman past the first trimester can't claim
her 'mental health' is in danger and get an abortion, which frequently
happens.
Hopefully soon, so tight that a woman can't get an abortion except for
rape/incest/physical health of the mother.
Life needs to be respected again, some women need to learn how to keep
their legs crossed. The child should not bear the punishment of the
mother's inconvenience of bearing it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Winstanley" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies Being Chopped Up Like Salami! |
05 Jul 2003 05:14:27 PM |
|
|
In article <dghegv0ml05vk0lcv6fnbof55imk5dm4cu@4ax.com>,
jules@ersatz.com says...
The only time a pregnant person has an entirely free choice regarding
whether or not to continue their pregnancy is during the first trimester
(which means they have a window of about six to eight weeks on average
by the time the pregnancy is discovered and they have made the necessary
arrangements). And even then they cannot have a legal termination if
they can't finance the medical fees.
How much MORE tight do people want to make it?
For now, tight enough so a woman past the first trimester can't claim
her 'mental health' is in danger and get an abortion, which frequently
happens.
You have statistics on how often this happens? If so, please post these
statistics (and a cite for the source).
Clearly you haven't the slightest interst in the health of the preson
who is pregnant!
Why, exactly, would you deny medical treatment for a mental health
problem to any man or woman who had a mental health problem?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies BeingChopped Up Like Salami! |
03 Jul 2003 02:29:02 PM |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
"Patrick Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkadbwg80o.fsf@eris.io.com...
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@citlink.net> writes:
Raymond Luxury-Yacht II wrote:
Fifty-one percent of...1,000 women surveyed...
Stop the presses! A little over 500 women don't approve of abortion!
I anxiously anticipate the special session of congress that will surely
be held to address the wishes of those 501 women.
Polls are useless.
Note that this poll is being trumpeted by the Washington Times -- the
Moonie
paper. I'm surprised they only found 51% in agreement with their
wishes --
it's usually skewed a lot more than that.
--PLH, "Reverend" Moon needs to change but one letter for a much more
accurate
name
So everyone's a statistical expert now?! If you actually READ what it says:
1) that it was sponsored by a pro-choice group (suggesting that the sample
would be reasonably random)
2) that the result was significant to p<0.03 i.e. 3% error margin (more than
adequate)
you would realise that it's of some note, and could semi-reasonably be
applied to a much wider group. But no, everyone's a smart ***** and only "A
little over 500 women don't approve of abortion"...
Polls are only good to show the tendencies or beliefs of those polled. I
don't care if it was conducted by a pro-choice group, a pro-life group
or Santa's elves. Polls are useless for any other purpose.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Stephen" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies Being Chopped Up Like Salami! |
04 Jul 2003 12:05:01 PM |
|
|
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@citlink.net> wrote in message
news:3F048426.F79007DD@citlink.net...
Stephen wrote:
"Patrick Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkadbwg80o.fsf@eris.io.com...
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@citlink.net> writes:
Raymond Luxury-Yacht II wrote:
Fifty-one percent of...1,000 women surveyed...
Stop the presses! A little over 500 women don't approve of abortion!
I anxiously anticipate the special session of congress that will
surely
be held to address the wishes of those 501 women.
Polls are useless.
Note that this poll is being trumpeted by the Washington Times -- the
Moonie
paper. I'm surprised they only found 51% in agreement with their
wishes --
it's usually skewed a lot more than that.
--PLH, "Reverend" Moon needs to change but one letter for a much more
accurate
name
So everyone's a statistical expert now?! If you actually READ what it
says:
1) that it was sponsored by a pro-choice group (suggesting that the
sample
would be reasonably random)
2) that the result was significant to p<0.03 i.e. 3% error margin (more
than
adequate)
you would realise that it's of some note, and could semi-reasonably be
applied to a much wider group. But no, everyone's a smart ***** and only
"A
little over 500 women don't approve of abortion"...
Polls are only good to show the tendencies or beliefs of those polled. I
don't care if it was conducted by a pro-choice group, a pro-life group
or Santa's elves. Polls are useless for any other purpose.
I beg to differ...Having studied both psychology and statistics I know for a
fact that you're wrong, since polling people is often a highly accurate
method of establishing the public view if the correct samples and confidence
levels are set. This would appear to be a random sample, and had a
confidence level of p<0.03, which is more than adequate.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Stephen" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies Being Chopped Up Like Salami! |
08 Jul 2003 12:21:52 PM |
|
|
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@citlink.net> wrote in message
news:3F0ADBA6.E3721846@citlink.net...
Stephen wrote:
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@citlink.net> wrote in message
news:3F048426.F79007DD@citlink.net...
Stephen wrote:
"Patrick Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkadbwg80o.fsf@eris.io.com...
Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@citlink.net> writes:
Raymond Luxury-Yacht II wrote:
Fifty-one percent of...1,000 women surveyed...
Stop the presses! A little over 500 women don't approve of
abortion!
I anxiously anticipate the special session of congress that will
surely
be held to address the wishes of those 501 women.
Polls are useless.
Note that this poll is being trumpeted by the Washington Times --
the
Moonie
paper. I'm surprised they only found 51% in agreement with their
wishes --
it's usually skewed a lot more than that.
--PLH, "Reverend" Moon needs to change but one letter for a much
more
accurate
name
So everyone's a statistical expert now?! If you actually READ what
it
says:
1) that it was sponsored by a pro-choice group (suggesting that the
sample
would be reasonably random)
2) that the result was significant to p<0.03 i.e. 3% error margin
(more
than
adequate)
you would realise that it's of some note, and could semi-reasonably
be
applied to a much wider group. But no, everyone's a smart ***** and
only
"A
little over 500 women don't approve of abortion"...
Polls are only good to show the tendencies or beliefs of those polled.
I
don't care if it was conducted by a pro-choice group, a pro-life group
or Santa's elves. Polls are useless for any other purpose.
I beg to differ...Having studied both psychology and statistics I know
for a
fact that you're wrong,
61% disagree. ;)
61% disagree that you're wrong?
since polling people is often a highly accurate
method of establishing the public view if the correct samples and
confidence
levels are set.
Based on what, opposition to the results?
The only way to determine if a poll is an accurate reflection of all
people is to poll all people.
You'd think that EXPERTS who use small samples to determine behaviour across
larger groups of people would know that wouldn't you? Obviously you're far
brighter than they are...
This would appear to be a random sample, and had a
confidence level of p<0.03, which is more than adequate.
So-called random samplings of data can and often are heavily skewed in
one direction or another.
Margin of error is nothing more than a guess.
I agree that samples are random and "random", but unless you can prove that
it isn't then I suggest you stop talking.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Omphalos" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies Being Chopped Up Like Salami! |
02 Jul 2003 10:05:53 PM |
|
|
On Wed 02 Jul 2003 01:07:24p, Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@citlink.net> wrote
in news:3F03116C.5049ED@citlink.net:
Raymond Luxury-Yacht II wrote:
Fifty-one percent of...1,000 women surveyed...
Stop the presses! A little over 500 women don't approve of abortion!
I anxiously anticipate the special session of congress that will
surely be held to address the wishes of those 501 women.
Polls are useless.
Unless you like the results, of course.
--
__________
==\ /================================
===\ /==You know how dumb the average==
====\ /===guy is? Well half of everyone==
=====\ /======is even dumber than that=====
======\/====================================
http://31337.pl
.
|
|
|
| User: "Omphalos" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies Being Chopped Up Like Salami! |
02 Jul 2003 11:08:54 PM |
|
|
As to the flat income tax, I am an ardent supporter, as long as it is
zero percent. Perhaps I have a simplistic, moralistic view, but I have
always thought that slavery was wrong. I know it is unfashionable to
think in terms of absolute morality, but human slavery is just plain
*wrong*, and it cannot be justified by any so-called common good that
comes of it. It was tried in Mississippi in the 1850's, and we will
not have it again. Or will we? What is slavery, in simple economic
terms, if not a 100% tax on income? You work, but someone else gets
100% of the benefits. Oh, they may give you a shed to live in, and
give you some food! But you are still a slave, because you had no
choice as to the arrangement!
Since I consider myself to be a free person, I can see no
justification for any taxes on my income, as it constitutes a form of
partial enslavement.
My body, my choice--my income, my choice.
And since I consider everyone ELSE (who is not convicted of a violent
crime) to be FREE PEOPLE, I cannot justify taxing their incomes any
more than I can justifying taxing mine.
Where have I gone wrong? Is 100% slavery absolutely wrong, but 50% or
25% or 17% slavery OK? Where and how do we draw the line?
Who can say that 17% slavery is acceptable, but that 19% is not?
Once it is established that partial slavery is legally and morally
acceptable, politics becomes a battle over how much your group gets to
enslave your neighbor, and how much her group gets to enslave you. (In
the flat-tax debate, this translates directly into a discussion of
which kinds of income will actually be counted as income, and which
kinds won't.)
In THAT political environment, taking personal responsibility becomes
more and more difficult, and less and less likely. In THAT
environment, the only "logical" choice is to play the politics of
envy, which leads to class division, which leads to hatred, which
leads to the destruction of civility.
As partial slaves, we must CATEGORICALLY REJECT the idea that our only
political choice is to gang up and try to enslave others. The only
real choice available to a slave is to escape the clutches of the
master, and to help other slaves escape the clutches of their masters.
Harriet Tubman was right.
We must choose between slavery, envy and dissension--on the one
hand--and freedom, choice, and voluntary association on the other.
Ah, but how do we support minimal govt, and keep it minimal? How do we
guarantee justice and human rights, defense of the nation, and a
system of law, WITHOUT this corrupting institution of partial slavery
known as the INCOME TAX?
I will leave the answer to a future posting, wheren I will
re-introduce the economic thinking of Henry George, a man who
influenced Mark Twain, Winston Churchill, and millions of people, a
century ago.
--
__________
=\ /================================
==\ /==You know how dumb the average==
===\ /===guy is? Well half of everyone==
====\ /======is even dumber than that=====
=====\/====================================
http://31337.pl
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: Pro-Life Women Are Now the Majority. Many Are Tired of Babies BeingChopped Up Like Salami! |
03 Jul 2003 02:31:09 PM |
|
|
Omphalos wrote:
On Wed 02 Jul 2003 01:07:24p, Frank Dwyer <fdwyer@citlink.net> wrote
in news:3F03116C.5049ED@citlink.net:
Raymond Luxury-Yacht II wrote:
Fifty-one percent of...1,000 women surveyed...
Stop the presses! A little over 500 women don't approve of abortion!
I anxiously anticipate the special session of congress that will
surely be held to address the wishes of those 501 women.
Polls are useless.
Unless you like the results, of course.
Polls are useless, period. I don't refer to them, I don't read them, I
don't quote them to back my stances on issues.
ALL polls are useless.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
