Two pieces of pending legislation highlight the division over abortion
We shall have a much clearer picture after the November 8th elections of what the congressional landscape on abortion is going to look like for at least the next two years.
A woman I know told me recently how she came to see abortion in a different light: “I was pro-abortion without thinking much about it. I just took it for granted that abortion was okay—women’s rights, the right to control your own body, the usual stuff. Then one day my mother told me she’d intended to abort me. She changed her mind when I started kicking. And hearing that, I changed my mind, too.”
She paused, then added, “I guess I’m still kicking.”
This woman was lucky. Sixty million unborn children—the number aborted in America since the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision in 1973—weren’t so fortunate.
As the November 8 election nears, preserving legal abortion is said to be one of the top issues on many people’s minds. If so, that reflects a decision by Democratic candidates to capitalize on negative reaction—whipped up by pro-abortion groups and major national media —against the court’s June ruling overturning Roe.
We shall have a much clearer picture after November 8 of what the congressional landscape on abortion is going to look like for at least the next two years. As matters stand, two pieces of pending legislation stand at opposite ends of the political debate.
One, backed by congressional Democrats and President Biden, is the misleadingly named Women’s Health Protection Act, which the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops calls “the most extreme abortion on demand bill our nation has ever seen.”
The bill would establish an unrestricted national right to abortion up to viability and then allow it any time after that on a health care provider’s word that continuing the pregnancy would harm the woman’s mental health. It would override virtually all state restrictions on abortion, undermine conscience protections for care providers who object to abortion, and allow taxpayer funding of abortion under Medicaid.
The other bill, introduced in the Senate by Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and in the House by Chris Smith (R-NJ), would establish a nationwide minimum standard for the protection of the unborn by barring abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy. Individual states would be free to adopt legislation providing tougher protection if they wished, as some have already done.
Unless one party has ironclad control of both the House and the Senate in the next Congress, neither bill has much immediate chance of passage. And even if by some miracle the Graham-Smith bill was adopted, Biden would be certain to veto it. In the short run, nevertheless, the bills do provide talking points for their respective sponsors.
From the prolife point of view, the best solution in the long run would be legislation—or, ideally, a constitutional amendment—declaring that the unborn child possesses the rights of legal personhood, including the right to life. Looked at realistically, there is no possibility of that in the foreseeable future, but as one prolife lawyer put it to me privately, “After all, it took the Supreme Court 50 years to overturn Roe v. Wade.”
That underlines the fact that lasting success of the prolife movement will require the patient, persevering work of education and motivation. Laws and court decisions are of crucial importance, of course, but in the long run, restoring a prolife culture in America will be essential.
The woman quoted above changed her mind when she realized that the unborn are human beings at an early stage of development. That’s the message. “I guess I’m still kicking,” the woman said. Prolife Americans have to keep kicking, too.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Anna Lulis from Moneta, Virginia, (left) who works for the pro-life group Students for Life of America, stands beside an abortion rights demonstrator outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on June 24, 2022, after the court’s decision in the Dobbs abortion case was announced. / Katie Yoder/CNA
Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 5, 2022 / 13:31 pm (CNA).
U.S. Catholic voters are split on the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, but a majority agrees that abortion should be restricted and that there should be at least some protections for the unborn child in the womb, according to a new EWTN News/RealClear Opinion Research poll.
The court’s June 24 ruling in the Mississippi abortion case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization upended 49 years of nationwide legalized abortion and freed states to regulate abortion as they see fit.
When asked whether they agreed or disagreed with Roe being overturned, 46.2% agreed, 47.8% disagreed, and 6% said they weren’t sure.
Catholic voters were similarly split on whether they are more or less likely to support a candidate who agrees with Roe’s dismantling: 42% said they were more likely, 41.9% said they were less likely, and 16.1% were unsure.
At the same time, the poll results point to apparent inconsistencies in Catholic voters’ positions on abortion.
While nearly half of Catholic voters in the poll said they disagreed with Roe being overturned, a large majority (86.5%) said they support some kind of limit on abortion, even though Roe and related abortion cases allowed only narrow regulation at the state level. The breakdown is as follows:
26.8% said abortion should be allowed only in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother;
19.8% said abortion should be allowed until 15 weeks when the baby can feel pain;
13.1% said that abortion should be allowed only during the first six months of pregnancy;
9.9% said that abortion should be allowed only until a heartbeat can be detected, and
9.1% said that abortion should be allowed only to save the life of the mother.
Of special note for Catholic pro-life leaders, only a small minority of Catholic voters — 7.8% — were aligned with the clear and consistent teaching of the Catholic Church that abortion should never be allowed.
On the other end of the spectrum of abortion views, 13.4% of Catholic voters said that abortion should be available to a woman at any time during her pregnancy.
The poll, conducted by the Trafalgar Group from Sept. 12–19, surveyed 1,581 Catholic voters and has a margin of error of 2.5%. The questionnaire was administered using a mix of six different methods, including phone calls, text messages, and email.
The poll’s results echo surveys of the general U.S. population on abortion. A Pew Research Center survey from March found that 19% of U.S. adults say abortion should be legal in all cases, while 8% said it should be illegal in all cases. More recent Gallup data from May found that 35% of U.S. adults say abortion should be legal under any circumstances while 13% said it should be illegal in all circumstances.
The Pew Research Center data also looked at Catholic adults. Thirteen percent said abortion should be legal in all cases, while 10% said it should be illegal in all cases.
A previous EWTN News/RealClear Opinion Research poll released in July found that 9% of Catholic likely voters said abortion should never be permitted and 18% said that abortion should be available at any time. The poll similarly showed that a majority of Catholic voters (82%) support some kind of restriction on abortion.
Confused about what Roe said?
The poll’s results came as little surprise to Catholic pro-life public policy experts such as Elizabeth R. Kirk.
“This study confirms a phenomenon we have known for some time, i.e., that there is an enormous disconnect between the scope of abortion practices permitted by the Roe regime and what abortion practices Americans actually support,” Kirk, director of the Center for Law and the Human Person at The Catholic University of America, told CNA.
Kirk, who also serves as a faculty fellow for the Institute for Human Ecology and research associate and lecturer at the Columbus School of Law, noted the finding that nearly 42% of Catholic voters said they are less likely to support a candidate who agrees with Roe being overturned.
“At first glance that suggests that many Catholic voters wanted to keep Roe in place,” she said. “Yet, the study also reveals that 86.5% of Catholic voters want some type of restriction on abortion access.”
Why the inconsistency? “Most people do not realize that Roe allowed states to permit unlimited abortion access throughout the entire pregnancy and made it difficult, or even impossible, to enact commonsense restrictions supported by the majority of Americans,” Kirk observed.
“Many people who ‘support Roe’ actually disagree, unknowingly, with what it permitted,” she added. “All Dobbs has done is return abortion policy to the legislative process so that the people may enact laws which reflect the public consensus.”
Mass-goers more strongly pro-life
The new poll, the second of three surveys of Catholic voters tied to the midterm elections on Nov. 8, shows that the opinions of Catholic voters on abortion and other issues vary depending on how often respondents attend Mass.
Only a small portion of those who attend Mass at least once a week said that abortion should be allowed at any time: 0% of those who attend Mass daily, 1% who attend more than once a week, and 8% of those who attend weekly support abortion without restrictions. In contrast, 57.5% of Catholic voters who attend Mass daily, 21.5% of those who attend more than once a week, and 15.6% of those who attend weekly say abortion should never be permitted.
In addition to respondents’ apparent confusion about what Roe stipulated, the poll suggests that many Catholic voters don’t fully understand what their Church teaches about abortion.
Less than one-third of Catholic voters who said they accept all Church teachings (31.1%) said that abortion should never be permitted, and 5% who profess to fully accept the Church’s teachings said abortion should be permitted at any time.
Overall, 32.8% of respondents reported attending Mass at least once a week, with another 30.7% attending once a year or less. Only 15% agreed that they accept all of the Church’s teachings and live their lives accordingly, with another 34.5% saying they generally accept most of the Church’s teachings and try to live accordingly.
Pew Research Center also looked at how Mass attendance factors into Catholics’ views on abortion. Among those who attend Mass at least once a week: 4% said abortion should be legal in all cases, and 24% said it should be illegal in all cases, Pew found.
Strong support for pregnancy centers
The poll asked Catholic voters about a variety of other topics including abortion limits, Holy Communion for pro-abortion politicians, conscience protections for health care workers, and pro-life pregnancy centers.
EWTN
Among the findings:
Catholic voters are prioritizing other issues above abortion. Only 10.1% of Catholic voters identified abortion as the most important issue facing the nation, falling behind inflation (34.2%) and the economy/jobs (19.7%) and tying with immigration. At the same time, a higher percentage of Catholic voters chose abortion than crime (8.7%), climate change (8.1% ), health care (6.8%), K–12 education (1.7%), or religious freedom (0.8%).
About half of Catholic voters (49.3%) disagreed that Catholic political leaders who support abortion publicly and promote policies that increase abortion access should refrain from taking Communion, while 36.7% said they should refrain.
A majority (67.4%) of Catholic voters said they support public funding for pro-life pregnancy centers that offer pregnant women life-affirming alternatives to abortion, while 18.3% said they did not favor using tax dollars for this purpose.
A comparable majority (61.8%) said that political and church leaders should be speaking out against the recent attacks and acts of vandalism on pregnancy resource centers.
When asked about conscience protections for health care workers that would allow them to opt out of providing “services” such as abortion, a majority of Catholic voters (60.7%) said that health care workers should not be obligated to engage in procedures that they object to based on moral or religious grounds. Conversely, 25.3% said that health care workers should be obligated to engage in procedures that they object to based on moral or religious grounds.
Work to be done
What is the takeaway from the latest poll, where abortion is concerned?
“This polling shows that Catholics, like the overwhelming majority of Americans, support commonsense protections for women and the unborn,” Ashley McGuire, a senior fellow with The Catholic Association, told CNA.
“It also affirms other recent polling that found Americans by strong numbers support the work of pregnancy resource centers in providing women facing crisis pregnancies with a real choice and the chance to thrive as mothers despite difficult circumstances,” she noted.
EWTN
At the same time, McGuire added, “This new polling is also a reminder that more work needs to be done in catechizing Catholics on foundational Church teaching in support of vulnerable life in all stages — an effort that is continually undermined by Catholic politicians in the highest echelons of power who use their platforms to advocate for extreme abortion policies in direct violation of Church teaching.”
Nearly all of those surveyed (99.2%) said they plan to vote in the midterm elections on Nov. 8.
The Virginia March for Life in Richmond, Sept. 17, 2021. / Christine Rousselle/CNA
Richmond, Va., Sep 17, 2021 / 16:00 pm (CNA).
Pro-life Virginians took to the streets of Richmond on Friday as part of the third annual Virginia March for Life.Th… […]
Washington D.C., Jan 30, 2023 / 17:15 pm (CNA).
The Biden administration Monday announced a proposal to eliminate employers’ ability to object to the Obamacare contraceptives mandate on moral grounds.This ch… […]
9 Comments
Has anyone played a fetal heartbeat outside a termination clinic?
Even decades prior to the Lambeth conference, Resolution 15 on contraception, America’s capitulation of absolute Truth and Divine authority had been creepily growing. The “free love” movement of the mid to later 1800s, along with the eugenics emerging in the early 20th century was a bow to that “individual” conscience that–if we are honest–will always give us our way. There must be an outside (ourselves) immutable authority that transcend development and group–if not mob–influences. W know it as the Magisterium of the Church. Regrettably, though, our country is pluralistic…even now agnostic and leaning atheistic. However, one could well state that the most dangerous enemy to natural law are those who claim devoutness to Catholicism/Christianity. It seems that we keep forgetting that the devil knows Scripture all too well. So, excuse me if I doubt that matters will improve, mostly anticipate the absolute dissolvement of the Republic and foresee intense persecution by enemies both domestic and foreign. However, I will strive to remain theologically hopeful…faithful…and charitable, even of good cheer.
I was pro-“choice” before I became an analytical person in my late teens. I simply could not find that second in time where I could say “there, now this is a human being”. The only time I could point to that something was not human yet was BEFORE the joining of the sperm and egg. After that, life grew. However, balanced against that knowledge is the fact that we all accept justified homicide in defense of self or others. THAT, in my opinion, is the major moral battle we are engaged in. We can no more say NO KILLING EVER of humans outside the woman, forbidding self and other defense, than we can say NO KILLING EVER of humans inside the womb, when in the extremely rare case that enwombed human may result in the death of the mother. For example, I knew a woman once who was advised to abort so she could have radiation and chemo for her newly discovered cancer. She refused, a model of self-sacrificial love for her child, but can we actually legislate that? Or a severely cognitively impaired woman, pregnant, who would suffer immeasurably from being pregnant and then being forced to give her baby up. Can we legislate that? Or an enwombed baby is found to have a genetic disorder which will cause daily horrific physical pain until their death, what is the moral choice? When I was pregnant, I told God that if my baby had one of those disorders, to save my baby from the immense daily suffering I had seen in my work, I would accept hell and abort. And yes, these disorders exist. I am talking ONLY of disorders of immense pain and suffering of the CHILD. This is such a morass of morality choices. Though I am deeply opposed to abortion and know it to be murder, and I am deeply opposed to killing anyone and know that to be murder, I also understand there are times of “justified killing” in different horrific circumstances. I wish we could shift the conversation to this, with wise legislation, versus all or none, black or white, “no abortion after 15 weeks period with no exceptions” or “no restrictions ever on any abortion” This makes me absolutely shudder with horror. Brings to mind Peter Singer, an “ethicist” at Princeton, who once advocated for “abortion” after birth for some time if the baby was defective.
One step at a time please Pauline. Why not law that asks us to accept,help and love the imperfect. The course you feel so deeply about is honorable, yet it will allow all abortions, forever. How many have to die before we at least take the first steps?
“From the prolife point of view, the best solution in the long run would be legislation—or, ideally, a constitutional amendment—declaring that the unborn child possesses the rights of legal personhood, including the right to life.”
The natural right to life is already recognized in the Constitution. It is highly likely that it is recognized in every state constitution. As such, “legislation” permitting abortion is void (And this would be the case even if the right to life wasn’t recognized in constitutions.), and amounts to complicity with murder.
“That underlines the fact that lasting success of the prolife movement will require the patient, persevering work of education and motivation. Laws and court decisions are of crucial importance, of course, but in the long run, restoring a prolife culture in America will be essential.”
This ought not to be the case. Do we believe that it is necessary to educate and motivate to convince people that murder is wrong? Of course not!
What is most needed is clear-headed just prosecutors and media publication of the prosecution(s).
Once the humanity of the unborn is recognized, it should be possible in law to protect that life, with recognition that such life is entitled to a legal advocate. If the decision to take that life is only between the mother and her doctor, the unborn child has no one to speak for him or her. As in self defense, our legal system should be able to weigh the needs of the child and the mother in those few extreme and horrific cases where natural human compassion calls for some leniency. This is not to say that an abortion in such cases is good or right, but is an example of where common sense and thoughtful legislation might bring some balance between widely divergent views.
Even after 60 Million lost souls of Gods creation.That’s still not enough for the Devil in his workshop.We still have far too many Catholics at MASS with hearts of stone.That continue to vote for men & women with a {D} after their name.The {D} is the “Brand” of the Devil.
Abortion is Anti GOD! We are:”One NATION under GOD!” GOD IS the GIVER of LIFE! Thus, what is Anti GOD is Anti USA! A NATION FOUDED UNDER JEWDEO – CRHISTIAN PRINCIPLES! Those are our ROOT! Anything that is away from its’root dies in the fullness of time! Would you like to see the flag of other country flying over our sky? Some GODLESS nations are waiting….
“One NATION under GOD, indivisible, with Liberty and justice for all!”
God is LIFE! He is the CREATOR OF EVERY LIVIING AND EVEY LIFELESS THING within the UNIVERSE that he created for all!
“If you love me, keep my COMMANDMENTS!” John 14:15! God is MASTER OF AL THINGS! HE is JUST! His JUSTICE wull be served in the FULNESS OF TIME! OBEY HIS LAW!
Has anyone played a fetal heartbeat outside a termination clinic?
Even decades prior to the Lambeth conference, Resolution 15 on contraception, America’s capitulation of absolute Truth and Divine authority had been creepily growing. The “free love” movement of the mid to later 1800s, along with the eugenics emerging in the early 20th century was a bow to that “individual” conscience that–if we are honest–will always give us our way. There must be an outside (ourselves) immutable authority that transcend development and group–if not mob–influences. W know it as the Magisterium of the Church. Regrettably, though, our country is pluralistic…even now agnostic and leaning atheistic. However, one could well state that the most dangerous enemy to natural law are those who claim devoutness to Catholicism/Christianity. It seems that we keep forgetting that the devil knows Scripture all too well. So, excuse me if I doubt that matters will improve, mostly anticipate the absolute dissolvement of the Republic and foresee intense persecution by enemies both domestic and foreign. However, I will strive to remain theologically hopeful…faithful…and charitable, even of good cheer.
I was pro-“choice” before I became an analytical person in my late teens. I simply could not find that second in time where I could say “there, now this is a human being”. The only time I could point to that something was not human yet was BEFORE the joining of the sperm and egg. After that, life grew. However, balanced against that knowledge is the fact that we all accept justified homicide in defense of self or others. THAT, in my opinion, is the major moral battle we are engaged in. We can no more say NO KILLING EVER of humans outside the woman, forbidding self and other defense, than we can say NO KILLING EVER of humans inside the womb, when in the extremely rare case that enwombed human may result in the death of the mother. For example, I knew a woman once who was advised to abort so she could have radiation and chemo for her newly discovered cancer. She refused, a model of self-sacrificial love for her child, but can we actually legislate that? Or a severely cognitively impaired woman, pregnant, who would suffer immeasurably from being pregnant and then being forced to give her baby up. Can we legislate that? Or an enwombed baby is found to have a genetic disorder which will cause daily horrific physical pain until their death, what is the moral choice? When I was pregnant, I told God that if my baby had one of those disorders, to save my baby from the immense daily suffering I had seen in my work, I would accept hell and abort. And yes, these disorders exist. I am talking ONLY of disorders of immense pain and suffering of the CHILD. This is such a morass of morality choices. Though I am deeply opposed to abortion and know it to be murder, and I am deeply opposed to killing anyone and know that to be murder, I also understand there are times of “justified killing” in different horrific circumstances. I wish we could shift the conversation to this, with wise legislation, versus all or none, black or white, “no abortion after 15 weeks period with no exceptions” or “no restrictions ever on any abortion” This makes me absolutely shudder with horror. Brings to mind Peter Singer, an “ethicist” at Princeton, who once advocated for “abortion” after birth for some time if the baby was defective.
One step at a time please Pauline. Why not law that asks us to accept,help and love the imperfect. The course you feel so deeply about is honorable, yet it will allow all abortions, forever. How many have to die before we at least take the first steps?
“From the prolife point of view, the best solution in the long run would be legislation—or, ideally, a constitutional amendment—declaring that the unborn child possesses the rights of legal personhood, including the right to life.”
The natural right to life is already recognized in the Constitution. It is highly likely that it is recognized in every state constitution. As such, “legislation” permitting abortion is void (And this would be the case even if the right to life wasn’t recognized in constitutions.), and amounts to complicity with murder.
“That underlines the fact that lasting success of the prolife movement will require the patient, persevering work of education and motivation. Laws and court decisions are of crucial importance, of course, but in the long run, restoring a prolife culture in America will be essential.”
This ought not to be the case. Do we believe that it is necessary to educate and motivate to convince people that murder is wrong? Of course not!
What is most needed is clear-headed just prosecutors and media publication of the prosecution(s).
Once the humanity of the unborn is recognized, it should be possible in law to protect that life, with recognition that such life is entitled to a legal advocate. If the decision to take that life is only between the mother and her doctor, the unborn child has no one to speak for him or her. As in self defense, our legal system should be able to weigh the needs of the child and the mother in those few extreme and horrific cases where natural human compassion calls for some leniency. This is not to say that an abortion in such cases is good or right, but is an example of where common sense and thoughtful legislation might bring some balance between widely divergent views.
Even after 60 Million lost souls of Gods creation.That’s still not enough for the Devil in his workshop.We still have far too many Catholics at MASS with hearts of stone.That continue to vote for men & women with a {D} after their name.The {D} is the “Brand” of the Devil.
Abortion is Anti GOD! We are:”One NATION under GOD!” GOD IS the GIVER of LIFE! Thus, what is Anti GOD is Anti USA! A NATION FOUDED UNDER JEWDEO – CRHISTIAN PRINCIPLES! Those are our ROOT! Anything that is away from its’root dies in the fullness of time! Would you like to see the flag of other country flying over our sky? Some GODLESS nations are waiting….
“One NATION under GOD, indivisible, with Liberty and justice for all!”
God is LIFE! He is the CREATOR OF EVERY LIVIING AND EVEY LIFELESS THING within the UNIVERSE that he created for all!
“If you love me, keep my COMMANDMENTS!” John 14:15! God is MASTER OF AL THINGS! HE is JUST! His JUSTICE wull be served in the FULNESS OF TIME! OBEY HIS LAW!