Oh No! Not Britain! Not On Pro-Choice! Damn!

[Annie]

Who would have thunk?

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1697424,00.html

Women demand tougher laws to curb abortions

· Poll reveals growing concern over late terminations
· Blair under pressure to agree review as MPs urge change

Denis Campbell and Gaby Hinsliff
Sunday January 29, 2006
The Observer

A majority of women in Britain want the abortion laws to be tightened to make it harder, or impossible, for them to terminate a pregnancy.

Evidence of a widespread public demand for the government to further restrict women's right to have an abortion is revealed in a remarkable Observer opinion poll. The findings have reignited the highly-charged debate on abortion, and increased the pressure on Tony Blair to review the current time limits.

The survey by MORI shows that 47 per cent of women believe the legal limit for an abortion should be cut from its present 24 weeks, and another 10 per cent want the practice outlawed altogether. Among the population overall, reducing the upper limit was the preferred option backed by the largest proportion of respondents, 42 per cent, made up of a 36-47 per cent split among men and women.

Only one person in three agreed that 'the current time limit is about right', with slightly fewer women (31 per cent) than men (35 per cent) saying that. Just 2 per cent of women and 5 per cent of men think the last possible date after which a woman can end a pregnancy should be increased from 24 weeks.

The leader of the 4.1 million Catholics in England and Wales, Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor, called on politicians last night to heed the evidence of a growing demand for a rethink on abortion policy, to include The Observer's findings. 'There has been a moral awakening over the last few years about abortion; the British public have been undergoing a reality check,' said his spokesman, Dr Austen Ivereigh. 'The Cardinal sees in this moral awakening a growing unease with, and erosion of, the idea of abortion as simply a woman's right.'

Increased awareness of the realities of abortion, and the impact of ultrasound images of a 23-week-old foetus smiling and grimacing, have made people change their views, said Ivereigh. The latter 'very dramatically showed that what had been depersonalised in many people's minds as a foetus was clearly seen to be a baby, a human being in formation, and that has come as a shock to many people', he added.

Abortion became a key issue in last year's general election campaign when Michael Howard, then the Conservative leader, said he wanted to see the maximum time limit cut to 20 weeks.

Former Liberal leader David Steel, the architect of the pioneering 1967 Abortion Act which made abortions legal for the first time in Britain, wants the upper limit reduced to 22 weeks.

The limit was originally set in 1967 at 28 weeks, because that was then taken to be the age at which a foetus would not be 'viable', but it was reduced to 24 weeks in 1990. Around 200,000 women a year undergo an abortion in Britain, although between 85 and 90 per cent occur within 12 weeks and only about 1.5 per cent after 20 weeks. Abortion is still illegal in Northern Ireland.

David Cameron, Howard's successor, backs a new limit of between 20 and 22 weeks. 'He thinks because of the advances in medical science there's now a case for it being lowered, although not dramatically. He would support it being reduced. That is his personal view,' said his spokesman.

Moves to reduce the time limit are now beginning to win the support of liberal-minded MPs who support the right to abortion. Dr Evan Harris, the Liberal Democrat MP and a former GP, called for an in-depth parliamentary inquiry to examine the scientific evidence about the survival rates of babies born at under 24 weeks, and then recommend any necessary changes to the law. 'The question has been raised about whether we are going to base the limit on viability - that was the basis under the existing law - and if it's on viability then viability is subject to change based on medical advances,' he said.

'The longer we don't debate this, the less confidence the public will have that Parliament is doing its job which is reviewing and keeping in mind how scientific advances impact on public policy.'

Abortion law has always been altered through private members' bills tabled by backbenchers rather than by government in the past, with MPs voting according to their conscience. However the tacit support of the government is vital to get private members' bills through, making the views of the Prime Minister and Health Secretary crucial.

Amid the debate last year, prompted by the images of unborn babies in the womb, Blair indicated that the government could be prepared to review the limits on abortion law. The then Health Secretary, John Reid, personally supports a lower time limit.

However, Patricia Hewitt, the current Health Secretary, seemed yesterday to rule out any reduction: 'I think it is very difficult for a woman contemplating a late termination and they need to be given very clear advice and support.'

Toni Belfield of the Family Planning Association, which opposes any reduction, said: 'The argument about medical advances misses the point. There needs to be access to late abortion after 20 weeks because a woman may not find out she is pregnant until 18 or 19 weeks, or be in a non-consensual relationship, or be told about a foetal abnormality.'

Julia Millington, of the Pro-Life Alliance of anti-abortion groups, said the findings were 'very encouraging'.

Ipsos MORI interviewed 1,790 people aged 16 to 64 by online questionnaire between 6 and 10 January.

 

[nosarcasm]

recently I read that the British also have a large percentage
of people that believe in Creationism and Intelligent Design.
Something like 40 % total.

 

[dmp]

I'm struck. Why is it called 'pro-choice' ONLY when the women CHOOSE an abortion? When women "Choose" to be against abortion it's "Against Women's Rights".

 

[Annie]

I'm struck. Why is it called 'pro-choice' ONLY when the women CHOOSE an abortion? When women "Choose" to be against abortion it's "Against Women's Rights".

I agree with that! But things being what they are, the poll is also good news, for the unborn.

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

I'm struck. Why is it called 'pro-choice' ONLY when the women CHOOSE an abortion? When women "Choose" to be against abortion it's "Against Women's Rights".

Because "a woman's right to choose" makes it easier to gain support and sympathy than "murdering an unborn child". But I guess you already knew that.

 

[Hobbit]

Because "a woman's right to choose" makes it easier to gain support and sympathy than "murdering an unborn child". But I guess you already knew that.

In the same way that you're more likely to sell veal if you don't label it "Dead Baby Cow."

 

[scaleyback]

recently I read that the British also have a large percentage
of people that believe in Creationism and Intelligent Design.
Something like 40 % total.

Hi. My first post on these boards. The above is completely wrong. Hardly anyone in the UK is even religious, let alone some sort of loony creationist.

Am I welcome here? There seem to be a lot of Americans on one of the UK boards I go on, so this is in the nature of an exchange trip!

 

[Annie]

Welcome! Now do you have sources? 22+17=39%
Pretty close to his 40% number.

Here's one for nosarcasm, who's MIA right now:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4648598.stm

Britons unconvinced on evolution
Just under half of Britons accept the theory of evolution as the best description for the development of life, according to an opinion poll.

Furthermore, more than 40% of those questioned believe that creationism or intelligent design (ID) should be taught in school science lessons.

The survey was conducted by Ipsos MORI for the BBC's Horizon series.

Its latest programme, A War on Science, looks into the attempt to introduce ID into science classes in the US.

Over 2,000 participants took part in the survey, and were asked what best described their view of the origin and development of life:

* 22% chose creationism
* 17% opted for intelligent design
* 48% selected evolution theory
* and the rest did not know.

Intelligent design is the concept that certain features of living things are so complex that their existence is better explained by an "intelligent process" than natural selection.

Education questioned

Andrew Cohen, editor of Horizon, commented: "I think that this poll represents our first introduction to the British public's views on this issue.

"Most people would have expected the public to go for evolution theory, but it seems there are lots of people who appear to believe in an alternative theory for life's origins."

When given a choice of three descriptions for the development of life on Earth, people were asked which one or ones they would like to see taught in science lessons in British schools:

* 44% said creationism should be included
* 41% intelligent design
* 69% wanted evolution as part of the science curriculum.

Participants over 55 were less likely to choose evolution over other groups.

"This really says something about the role of science education in this country and begs us to question how we are teaching evolutionary theory," Andrew Cohen added.

The findings prompted surprise from the scientific community. Lord Martin Rees, President of the Royal Society, said: "It is surprising that many should still be sceptical of Darwinian evolution. Darwin proposed his theory nearly 150 years ago, and it is now supported by an immense weight of evidence.

"We are, however, fortunate compared to the US in that no major segment of UK religious or cultural life opposes the inclusion of evolution in the school science curriculum."

In the US, a recent high profile court case ruled that the intelligent design movement is motivated by a desire to introduce God into the classroom.

This came after parents in Pennsylvania took a school board to court for demanding that biology classes should not teach evolution as fact.

Horizon: A War on Science was broadcast on BBC Two at 2100GMT on Thursday, 26 January 2006

 

[scaleyback]

I am flabbergasted.

And a little embarrassed. Who would have thought that there was that level of ignorance in my country?

Clutching at straws, I wonder where the survey was conducted... it absolutely does not reflect my experience. As far as I know, only one person in my extensive circle of friends and colleagues and aquaintances is even a Christian.

Amazing what you learn when you ask how others see you.

Tell me, is it true that there is a real swell of support for anti-scientific theories in the US?

 

[nosarcasm]

Welcome! Now do you have sources? 22+17=39%
Pretty close to his 40% number.

Here's one for nosarcasm, who's MIA right now:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4648598.stm

I read that article, thats how I came up with my 40%. I was surprised
too.

But now looking at the Anglo American non print of the Mohammed cartoons
it seems the US and England are closer in their mindset then I thought.

 

[scaleyback]

Perhaps if I am ever sober on a Sunday I may walk along to the church and see if it is full. Luckily, there is a pub just next door so the trip won't be wasted.

 

[Annie]

I read that article, thats how I came up with my 40%. I was surprised
too.

But now looking at the Anglo American non print of the Mohammed cartoons
it seems the US and England are closer in their mindset then I thought.

Us Anglos are like that.

 

[nosarcasm]

well the Germans are always surprised.

What the Americans are helping the English? Darnit.

 

[Annie]

well the Germans are always surprised.

What the Americans are helping the English? Darnit.

I was insinuating that the English and Americans might fight like dogs and cats, but underneath it all, we're cousins and more alike than not.

 

[Abbey Normal]

Perhaps if I am ever sober on a Sunday I may walk along to the church and see if it is full. Luckily, there is a pub just next door so the trip won't be wasted.

Welcome to the board. I hope that if you stick around, you will have more to say than just the tired old Christians are nuts, religion is stupid, creationsim is non-scientific mantra. We already have a number of posters who are stuck on those like a broken record, and I am hopeful that your interests will be broader than that. It's interesting to get a Euro pov on politics, for example.

Personally, I fell in love with your country and can't wait to go back for another visit. However, you may be disappointed to learn that my favorite thing about England is visiting your old abbeys.

The pubs are nice, too.