Since 2010, 32 states have restricted abortions

(CBS News) While the national GOP is trying to tamp down the abortion issue after Mo. Rep. Todd Akin's controversial comments, it's growing on the local level.

Americans have been divided over the issue of abortion since the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade almost 40 years ago, and at the state level the debate is louder than ever.

In the past two years alone, 32 states have adopted some form of abortion restriction.

The Guttmacher Institute, which supports abortion rights, tracks legislation. Elizabeth Nash, its state issues manager, said: "Since the November 2010 elections, we have just seen a huge tidal wave of abortion restrictions roll across states."

In the first six months of 2012, 15 states passed 39 restrictions on abortion. Last year, 24 states passed 92 restrictions, an all-time record.

Restrictions include bans on abortions at 20 weeks; 24- to 72-hour waiting periods; and a requirement to inform women of suicide risks if they seek an abortion.

Rubio: Opposing abortion isn't about denying rights
NH sheriff candidate sorry for abortion comment
Watch: Abortion talk could help Obama in 2012, pollster says

The success of state restrictions may be the result of changing public opinion on abortion.

On the abortion issue, a recent Gallup poll asked: "Would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life." Fifty percent of Americans now call themselves "pro-life." Fourty-one percent call themselves "pro-choice," a record low.

It's also due to an active campaign by anti-abortion forces.

"We have been able to enact legislation in eight states to protect unborn children at 20 weeks or more who are experiencing pain in abortion," said Susan Musket with the National Right to Life Committee.

They're not just active in legislatures. More than a dozen anti-abortion cases are pending in state courts.

This week a Texas court ruled that the state could withhold family planning funds from Planned Parenthood, whose medical services include abortions.

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

by Dancing-in-the-Streets August 27, 2012 3:37 PM EDT
Well did I get it right George?
And what was the point you were trying to make?
--------------------
Did you miss this question?

[Lindag20]

Well it's been an interesting afternoon with Mortar and George, but I have thing to do. See ya folks.

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

Have a good afternoon Linda! : )

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

The practice of abortion, the termination of a pregnancy so that it does not result in birth, dates back to ancient times. Pregnancies were terminated through a number of methods, including the administration of abortifacient herbs, the use of sharpened implements, the application of abdominal pressure, and other techniques.

[Lindag20]

Do these pro-life people understand that abortions happened EVEN when they were illegal? I remember my mom (who was the biggest prude that ever existed) telling a story about a roommate in the boarding house she lived in before she was married having an abortion and almost dying. Mom was quite blase about it and didn't condemn the other woman in any way.

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

I think many of them believe this is something relatively new that just started about the time Roe vs. Wade happened....its nothing new.

[seabass6251]

Murder has been around while too. Why is it crime when abortion is not?

[Repubs_R_Fiscal_Liberals]

by Unsilent_Majority August 27, 2012 3:27 PM EDT
That's like saying if you don't want to drink and drive, then don't. Otherwise leave the freedom and liberty of those who do want to drink and drive alone...(regardless if innocents are killed as a result).

-----------

Drinking and driving is illegal.

Abortion is not.

Go fish.

[Lindag20]

The biggest issue I see with these "pro-life" people is that they live in some sort of simple "black and white" world where everything is totally cut and dried. There are NO shades of grey like there are in the real world. "Protect" the unborn at all costs, "don't get pregnant", "assume responsibility", etc. I've told this story before and I'll tell it again. A friend of my daughter was raped by a neighbor at age 13, due to his threats she was afraid to tell her mother. She became pregnant and by the time her mother discovered the pregnancy it was too late to do anything about it. She had a baby when barely 14 and wanted to give it up for adoption. The rapist REFUSED to sign the adoption papers and said he'd take the child if the mother didn't want her. The family was left with the choice of giving the baby to the rapist or keeping the child. They kept her. This is the REAL world that people face, not some simple life where things work the "right way".

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

I agree Linda.
Their ideas are set in some perfect world.
But this world is NOT perfect!
People don't always get married for Love and Life and raise wonderful children and live happily every after!
Women don't always have a choice when it comes to the sex.
Men don't always stick around when they create a child.
Parents aren't always supportive when their daughters become pregnant.
Marriages aren't always good, there are times when it makes more sense to end the marriage than it does to stay in it.

[seabass6251]

If the rapist had been imprisioned for his crime, how was he going to take custody of the child?

BS....

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

They aren't always convicted. Sometimes it turns into a he said/she said thing that is not proveable. Doesn't change the fact that it happened.

[seabass6251]

You're worse than Mr. Dimwit.

In today's terms, the baby's blood test convicts the rapist.

If it smells like and looks like it, it probably is BS.

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

That baby's blood test will say whether he fathered the baby, but not whether it was consentual!

[seabass6251]

Uh...if she was only 13, even a Liberal retard like you could do the math. I don't think any state allows for consentual sex at 13.

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

ping

[Repubs_R_Fiscal_Liberals]

by Repubs_R_Fiscal_Liberals August 27, 2012 1:40 PM EDT
I find it interesting that these pro-birthers claim to all be "conservatives", yet:

1) are FOR taking away a woman's freedom and liberty with her own body

2) are FOR the resulting increase in welfare which will occur if women who cannot afford babies are forced to have them

3) they never seem to answer "yes" to "have you adopted?"

4) they don't think of the childhood an unwanted child will have under a resentful parent.

-----------------------------------------

by Unsilent_Majority August 27, 2012 2:39 PM EDT
1) the freedom to make a medical decision is trumped by the freedom of the baby to live

>>>>>>>>>>> Well, an inviable fetus is not a baby.

2) life is about personal responsibility. if you're not prepared to be a parent, don't get pregnant. If your efforts fail, then step up to the plate and either be accountable for your actions or give the baby up for adoption.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You may do that, but you do not get to dictate that others must birth an unwanted parasite.

3) Well...You simply made-up #3. They ofter answer yes and my wife and I answer yes and my sister and her husband answered yes 3 times.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't make up #3. You're the first to answer that way.

4) A perfect axample of the mindset of a disgistingly selfish person that you are. Clearly, such resentment is misdirected at a child who is not responsible for his/her circumstances (but I guess people like you welcome the easy way out). And in reality, for generations in this country women could not have abortions yet we don't seem to suffer from generations of children not loved by their families.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you are OK with kids growing up with resentful parent. To me, that's disgusting of you.

Your list is nothing but a crystal-clear example of the problem with liberalism...freedom is worthless if you don't exercise the responsibility that goes along with it.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Libertarian. Go fish. You simply don't understand that your religious beliefs ONLY apply to those who share them.

.

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

And in reality, for generations in this country women could not have abortions yet we don't seem to suffer from generations of children not loved by their families.
------------------------------
Watch the movie "Cider House Rules"
Read the book - "The Mists of Avalon"

[Repubs_R_Fiscal_Liberals]

Cider House Rules was disturbing. Well-done movie, though!

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

It was disturbing! I just watched it last week and I wasn't expecting that at all!

[Unsilent_Majority]

Here's an interesing fact for those on the left...President Obama, as I'm sure you all know or would assume, received a 100% approval rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America while serving in the senate.

In 2011, the Pro-life movement hung a huge billboard in a predominantly black NYC Neighborhood depicting a young african american girl. The sign said, "The most dangersous place for an african american is in the womb"...Sounds pretty awful, right? pretty racist? Indeed, Obama and the left reacted with accusations of racism until the pro-life group caved and took down the sign.

Well waht do the fact say? The facts say this...More than 15 million black children have been aborted since 1973. Abortion is the number one killer of African American youth surpassing deaths caused by accidents, heart disease, stroke, crimes, HIV-AIDS and all other deaths... combined!

[Repubs_R_Fiscal_Liberals]

Who cares about Obama?

If you don't want an abortion, don't get one. Otherwise, leave Freedom and Liberty to those who feel they need one.

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

UNITED STATES

Number of abortions per year: 1.37 Million (1996)
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 3,700

Who's having abortions (age)?
52% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. are younger than 25: Women aged 20-24 obtain 32% of all abortions; Teenagers obtain 20% and girls under 15 account for 1.2%.

Who's having abortions (race)?
While white women obtain 60% of all abortions, their abortion rate is well below that of minority women. Black women are more than 3 times as likely as white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are roughly 2 times as likely.

Who's having abortions (marital status)?
64.4% of all abortions are performed on never-married women; Married women account for 18.4% of all abortions and divorced women obtain 9.4%.

Who's having abortions (religion)?
Women identifying themselves as Protestants obtain 37.4% of all abortions in the U.S.; Catholic women account for 31.3%, Jewish women account for 1.3%, and women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions. 18% of all abortions are performed on women who identify themselves as "Born-again/Evangelical".

Who's having abortions (income)?
Women with family incomes less than $15,000 obtain 28.7% of all abortions; Women with family incomes between $15,000 and $29,999 obtain 19.5%; Women with family incomes between $30,000 and $59,999 obtain 38.0%; Women with family incomes over $60,000 obtain 13.8%.

Why women have abortions
1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).

At what gestational ages are abortions performed:
52% of all abortions occur before the 9th week of pregnancy, 25% happen between the 9th & 10th week, 12% happen between the 11th and 12th week, 6% happen between the 13th & 15th week, 4% happen between the 16th & 20th week, and 1% of all abortions (16,450/yr.) happen after the 20th week of pregnancy.

[Unsilent_Majority]

That's like saying if you don't want to drink and drive, then don't. Otherwise leave the freedom and liberty of those who do want to drink and drive alone...(regardless if innocents are killed as a result).

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

I can't find the quote - but if you want to bring Obama into this - he basically thinks Women are inteligent enough to make their own choices and that they don't need a group of Men making those choices for them!

[seabass6251]

As long as men continue to pay for their choices.

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

If women could conceive asexually men wouldn't be required to pay.

But as long as men can get Viagra from Insurance then I see no reason why women can't get birth control pills!

[seabass6251]

Most (if not all) insurance plans do not pay for Viagra.

Obamacare makes me pay for others' birth control though. Seems reasonable I guess if you were a Liberal nut job.

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

Okay let me try - I think the point was a fetus cannot survive outside the womb. And a mother, has no choice but to help it survive(unless there is an abortion) -therefore it could qualify as a parasite I guess.

But once the child is Outside the mother - the child can be supported by someone else. And the mother now has a choice whether or not to walk away.

[Lindag20]

Yes Zann, that was what I was SAYING but George doesn't want to hear that. Say if the parents die shortly after a child is born, then others can take care of it. There is no real BIOLOGIAL need for the actual parents to provide for the physical needs of the child.

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

More simply - once its born, the child needs someone to take care of it but it does not have to be the mother. And once its born the mother's body will not force her to take care of it, which is what I would think a "biological need" to take care of it would be.

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

Well did I get it right George?
And what was the point you were trying to make?

[EmpireGeorge______--]

by Lindag20 August 27, 2012 2:19 PM EDT

Oh boo hoo George. A parent isn't biologically REQUIRED to care for their child.
_________________

Yes they are, and if they don't they get charged with neglect.....and the charge isn't for social neglect, it's for denying the child biological nurishment....wrong again

[Repubs_R_Fiscal_Liberals]

You left off the second half of her comment, which explained that parents have no BIOLOGICAL requirement; only a social requirement.

And your comment just reinforced her point.

Seriously, you need to hang it up. You lost when you started.

[Repubs_R_Fiscal_Liberals]

and the charge isn't for social neglect, it's for denying the child biological nurishment

--------------

So you REALLY don't understand that failing to provide nourishment is a social issue, which is why social services often prosecutes such cases? Wow.

[EmpireGeorge______--]

I can't lose, because all of science, all of biology is behind me.....sorry, that you are just clueless about anything scientific.....maybe you should stick with industrial complexes, or picking and choosing certain quotes from the 40's that meet your agenda......that's what you know.

[Repubs_R_Fiscal_Liberals]

Empire - honestly, I can't help you if you won't do your own research. You refuse to look up anything, yet claim you have the support of the things you haven't looked up.

You're more "off" today than usual, and that's not good.

[seabass6251]

Prosecutors prosecute crimes, Mr. Dimwit...not social services.

[Unsilent_Majority]

If you follow the link below...it's safe...at the bottom you will see a picture of Samuel Alexander Armas. It was taken when sam was only 21 weeks into his mom's gestation. Doctor's performed pre-birth surgery on him at that age in order to save his life, which he did.

Remember, this picture is at 21 months...it could just as easily be a picture of a late-term abortion. Thank god it's not.

http://abortionabout.com/latetermabortionstatistics.html

[Repubs_R_Fiscal_Liberals]

Remember, this picture is at 21 months..
-----------
Then what you're describing is infanticide, not abortion of an unwanted parasite.

[Unsilent_Majority]

No Einstein...late-term abortions (the lion-share of the most recent state restrictions on abortion) are those performed after week 20. In fact, using the same link, the year that picture was taken there were 11,874 unborn babies ABORTED at or OLDER than the the 21 weeks depicted in little sam's picture.

[Lindag20]

I thought 9 months was a LONG time to carry a baby. 21 MONTHS?? Are you kidding???

[Repubs_R_Fiscal_Liberals]

by Unsilent_Majority August 27, 2012 2:53 PM EDT
No Einstein...

---------

I'm not the one who wrote "21 months"...

[Unsilent_Majority]

No, you were the one who said an abortion after 21 months is not an abortion but instead infanticide, which is 100% wrong. A late term abortion is one that happens after 20 months. Infanticide happens after birth.

[Dancing-in-the-Streets]

Unsilent_Majority - there is a typo in your original post - you obviously typed 21 months when you meant 21 weeks.