Letter: Abortion: a choice of poll questions
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Why are Dawn Primarolo and her colleagues (letter, 7 September) so fiercely defensive of liberal abortion if they are correct in their interpretation of opinion polls?
By promoting polls which hinge on the word "choice", the pro-abortion lobby has repeatedly claimed that pro-life MPs are out of touch with public opinion. When asked on what grounds they believe abortion should be allowed, the majority of people reject abortion on demand. Only 31 per cent of respondents to a Gallup poll in 1993 agreed that abortion should be available on demand. In August this year an NOP poll for the Sunday Times showed that 64 per cent of respondents thought that Britain's abortion law should be reviewed in the light of medical advances. Only 26 per cent thought that the present law was adequate.
Jane Roe of the Abortion Law Reform Association has admitted that pro- abortionists use the word "choice" because fewer people favour "abortion on request" than "choice", and "if you say 'abortion on demand' it's fewer still". (Radio 4, 2 May 1996)
In the light of evidence on foetal sentience and the recent selective killing of a twin, opposition to the parliamentary campaign to restore a meaningful degree of protection to unborn children is becoming ever harder for the pro-abortionists to justify.
JOHN SMEATON
National Director
The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children
London SW1
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments