persuasive speech about pro abortion

Our Writers
How to Order
Assignment Writing Service
Report Writing Service
Buy Coursework
Dissertation Writing Service
Research Paper Writing Service
All Essay Services

Persuasive Essay Guide

Persuasive Essay About Abortion

Crafting a Convincing Persuasive Essay About Abortion

How To Write a Persuasive Essay About Abortion?

Abortion is a controversial topic, with people having differing points of view and opinions on the matter. There are those who oppose abortion, while some people endorse pro-choice arguments.

It is also an emotionally charged subject, so you need to be extra careful when crafting your persuasive essay .

Before you start writing your persuasive essay, you need to understand the following steps.

Step 1: Choose Your Position

The first step to writing a persuasive essay on abortion is to decide your position. Do you support the practice or are you against it? You need to make sure that you have a clear opinion before you begin writing.

Once you have decided, research and find evidence that supports your position. This will help strengthen your argument.

Check out the video below to get more insights into this topic:

Step 2: Choose Your Audience

The next step is to decide who your audience will be. Will you write for pro-life or pro-choice individuals? Or both?

Knowing who you are writing for will guide your writing and help you include the most relevant facts and information.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That's our Job!

Step 3: Define Your Argument

Now that you have chosen your position and audience, it is time to craft your argument.

Start by defining what you believe and why, making sure to use evidence to support your claims. You also need to consider the opposing arguments and come up with counter arguments. This helps make your essay more balanced and convincing.

Step 4: Format Your Essay

Once you have the argument ready, it is time to craft your persuasive essay. Follow a standard format for the essay, with an introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion.

Make sure that each paragraph is organized and flows smoothly. Use clear and concise language, getting straight to the point.

Step 5: Proofread and Edit

The last step in writing your persuasive essay is to make sure that you proofread and edit it carefully. Look for spelling, grammar, punctuation, or factual errors and correct them. This will help make your essay more professional and convincing.

These are the steps you need to follow when writing a persuasive essay on abortion. It is a good idea to read some examples before you start so you can know how they should be written.

Continue reading to find helpful examples.

Persuasive Essay About Abortion Examples

To help you get started, here are some example persuasive essays on abortion that may be useful for your own paper.

Short Persuasive Essay About Abortion

Persuasive Essay About No To Abortion

What Is Abortion? - Essay Example

Persuasive Speech on Abortion

Legal Abortion Persuasive Essay

Persuasive Essay About Abortion in the Philippines

Persuasive Essay about legalizing abortion

You can also read m ore persuasive essay examples to imp rove your persuasive skills.

Examples of Argumentative Essay About Abortion

An argumentative essay is a type of essay that presents both sides of an argument. These essays rely heavily on logic and evidence.

Here are some examples of argumentative essay with introduction, body and conclusion that you can use as a reference in writing your own argumentative essay.

Abortion Persuasive Essay Introduction

Argumentative Essay About Abortion Conclusion

Argumentative Essay About Abortion Pdf

Argumentative Essay About Abortion in the Philippines

Argumentative Essay About Abortion - Introduction

Abortion Persuasive Essay Topics

If you are looking for some topics to write your persuasive essay on abortion, here are some examples:

Should abortion be legal in the United States?
Is it ethical to perform abortions, considering its pros and cons?
What should be done to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies that lead to abortions?
Is there a connection between abortion and psychological trauma?
What are the ethical implications of abortion on demand?
How has the debate over abortion changed over time?
Should there be legal restrictions on late-term abortions?
Does gender play a role in how people view abortion rights?
Is it possible to reduce poverty and unwanted pregnancies through better sex education?
How is the anti-abortion point of view affected by religious beliefs and values?

These are just some of the potential topics that you can use for your persuasive essay on abortion. Think carefully about the topic you want to write about and make sure it is something that interests you.

Check out m ore persuasive essay topics that will help you explore other things that you can write about!

Tough Essay Due? Hire Tough Writers!

Facts About Abortion You Need to Know

Here are some facts about abortion that will help you formulate better arguments.

According to the Guttmacher Institute , 1 in 4 pregnancies end in abortion.
The majority of abortions are performed in the first trimester.
Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures, with less than a 0.5% risk of major complications.
In the United States, 14 states have laws that restrict or ban most forms of abortion after 20 weeks gestation.
Seven out of 198 nations allow elective abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.
In places where abortion is illegal, more women die during childbirth and due to complications resulting from pregnancy.
A majority of pregnant women who opt for abortions do so for financial and social reasons.
According to estimates, 56 million abortions occur annually.

In conclusion, these are some of the examples, steps, and topics that you can use to write a persuasive essay. Make sure to do your research thoroughly and back up your arguments with evidence. This will make your essay more professional and convincing.

Need the services of a persuasive essay writing service ? We've got your back!

MyPerfectWords.com that provides help to students in the form of professionally written essays. Our persuasive essay writer can craft quality persuasive essays on any topic, including abortion.

So, just ask our experts ' do my essay ' and get professional help.

Frequently Asked Questions

What should i talk about in an essay about abortion.

When writing an essay about abortion, it is important to cover all the aspects of the subject. This includes discussing both sides of the argument, providing facts and evidence to support your claims, and exploring potential solutions.

What is a good argument for abortion?

A good argument for abortion could be that it is a woman’s choice to choose whether or not to have an abortion. It is also important to consider the potential risks of carrying a pregnancy to term.

Write Essay Within 60 Seconds!

Caleb S. has been providing writing services for over five years and has a Masters degree from Oxford University. He is an expert in his craft and takes great pride in helping students achieve their academic goals. Caleb is a dedicated professional who always puts his clients first.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Keep reading

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Abortion — Persuasive Pro Choice Abortion Stance

Persuasive Pro Choice Abortion Stance

Categories: Abortion Women's Rights

About this sample

Words: 1127 |

Published: Mar 25, 2024

Words: 1127 | Pages: 2 | 6 min read

Introduction, body paragraph 1: bodily autonomy and reproductive rights, body paragraph 2: consequences of restrictive abortion laws, body paragraph 3: personal beliefs and abortion attitudes, body paragraph 4: specific abortion policies and their impact, body paragraph 5: additional consequences of restrictive abortion laws, body paragraph 6: further exploration of counterarguments related to the pro-life perspective, counterarguments: addressing the pro-life perspective.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Karlyna PhD

Verified writer

Expert in: Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 938 words

5 pages / 2476 words

2 pages / 702 words

5 pages / 2211 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Abortion

Abortion is a controversial issue that has remained a topic of heated debate in the United States and other parts of the world. It is a medical procedure that involves terminating a pregnancy before the fetus is viable. While [...]

Abortion has been a contentious issue for centuries and has sparked heated debate around the world. Women have been seeking abortions for various reasons such as medical, economic, social, and personal needs. However, despite [...]

Satire is a potent tool that can be employed to address sensitive topics, and one such contentious issue is the abortion debate. Abortion, a divisive subject, has fueled passionate arguments for many years. The purpose of this [...]

It is crucial to understand and critically examine the topic of abortion rights. This contentious issue has been a subject of debate and controversy for decades, with individuals holding strong opinions on both sides of the [...]

Abortion is a procedure to end a pregnancy so that it does not result in the birth of a child. In order to have an abortion, women take the abortion pill or have a surgical abortion to remove the emyo or fetus and placenta from [...]

Humans should have the right to be able to abort their children. It is undeniable that humans should have abortion rights. That is just the bare minimum. These reasons will follow up for why.Primarily, Laws should not be kept on [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

Dec 12, 2018

Pro-life persuasion: How to discuss abortion with logic and grace

How can we persuade others that abortion is an injustice? It's not always easy.

Some people see ultrasound images or fetal models and quickly recognize the humanity of unborn children. Some people hear descriptions of abortion procedures and understand the inhumanity of dismembering human beings in their mother's womb.

Other people, though, are not persuaded by these facts. They may believe that unborn children aren't really human if they can't yet think or feel. They may deeply value the right to bodily autonomy . They may think that making abortion illegal would have unfair or dangerous consequences for women.

How do we change the views of these abortion supporters? Most of them are unlikely to spend time reading pro-life articles or watching pro-life presentations. Most are unfamiliar with the best pro-life arguments and responses.

This is where dialogue comes into play. Dialogue, in many cases, is the only way to share the pro-life message, answer concerns, get people thinking—and change their minds. Yet conversations about abortion, especially on social media, are often unproductive or even counterproductive.

Here are three things you can do that will make your conversations—whether face-to-face or through another medium—more fruitful.

(1) Know the basics of the debate

You don't need to know everything about the abortion debate, but it's helpful to know some basics. Remember these three steps of the pro-life argument:

The unborn (the human embryo or fetus) is a human being—a living human organism at the earliest developmental stages. This is a fact of science .

All human beings—regardless of age, size, ability, and dependency—have human rights. This is a principle of justice .

Therefore, the unborn human being has human rights, which include the right not to be intentionally killed.

That's why killing unborn children through abortion is unjust. It's pretty simple.

Most arguments in defense of abortion (such as appeals to choice , circumstances , consequences , and tolerance ) assume that unborn children don't count as valuable members of the human family. You can show this using a tactic Scott Klusendorf calls "trot out the toddler." Ask whether an argument for abortion would work as a justification for killing toddlers or other born human beings. Do parents facing economic hardship, for example, have the right to choose to kill their 3-year-olds? Of course not. If unborn children also have human rights, like born humans do, then these arguments don’t justify killing them either.

Other arguments try to show that unborn children don't count. One approach is to claim that unborn children aren’t even human beings in the biological sense (a denial of step 1). But that's empirically false . The science of embryology shows that human embryos and fetuses are living (they grow, metabolize food into energy, and react to stimuli), human (they have human DNA and human parents), and whole organisms developing themselves through the different stages of life as members of our species.

Another approach is to argue that although unborn children are biologically human, they do not have the same value and right to life as older human beings—they are not yet "persons" like we are (a denial of step 2). But the differences between born and unborn human beings simply aren’t relevant to whether or not an individual bears a right to life. Unborn children may look different, for example, but appearance has nothing to do with value. Unborn children are less physically and mentally developed, but toddlers are less developed than teenagers, and that doesn't make them any less important. Unborn children are dependent on someone else , but so are newborn children and people with disabilities.

When an abortion supporter claims unborn children don't have rights because they lack a particular characteristic, you can highlight two major problems with this view. First, that characteristic, whatever it is, always excludes more human beings than just unborn children. Second, the characteristic comes in varying degrees, and that means some people are more valuable or have greater rights than others. If self-awareness is the trait that confers rights, for example, then comatose patients and human infants have no rights, and people who are more self-aware have greater rights than those who are less self-aware. Equality, according to this kind of view, is a myth.

The pro-life view, by contrast, holds that we have rights simply because we are human—not because of what we look like, or what we can do, or what others think or feel about us, but rather because of what (the kind of being) we are . So all human beings matter, and they matter equally because they are equally human.

The next time you explain to someone why you're pro-life, try saying this: "Because I'm convinced that human equality is really true." Or this: "Because I think human rights are inclusive —they belong to all humans rather than only some." It's probably not the explanation the other person is expecting, and it almost guarantees that you'll have a substantive conversation.

A third type of argument says that, regardless of the nature or value of the unborn child, abortion is justified because pregnant women have a right to control what happens inside their own bodies. But this bodily autonomy should respect the bodies of other human beings. Even most abortion supporters, for example, agree that pregnant women shouldn't ingest drugs that cause birth defects. And if harming unborn children is wrong, then killing them by crushing and tearing them into pieces is even worse.

According to a more sophisticated version of the argument, just as we may refuse to donate an organ to save someone else's life, a pregnant woman may refuse to let an unborn child use her body to survive. Abortion, however, isn't merely the withdrawal of bodily support—it is intentional and active killing, often by dismemberment, which violates the child's right to life and right to bodily integrity. The father and mother, moreover, bear responsibility for the care of their child because they brought her into existence.

If you just understand these basics—the logic of the pro-life view and the three main categories of arguments in support of abortion—you will know more about the abortion debate than almost everyone. And that gives you a huge advantage in any conversation.

(2) Show respect and compassion

To have any chance of persuasion, though, you have to communicate your knowledge in a particular way. You have to be the kind of person to whom others will listen.

Conduct yourself with gentleness and respect . This is the right way to act. The pro-life view, after all, is that every human being deserves our respect (even those with whom we disagree about whether everyone deserves respect!). This is also the only way that actually works. You won't persuade someone if you refuse to listen to and understand her perspective, or if you make your points with condescension, annoyance, anger, or name-calling.

Avoid judgments about character and motive. People who support abortion, however mistaken their view, are not the enemy. Even people who work in the abortion industry are not the enemy. ( Many members of that industry have become pro-life, in fact, and some have even become pro-life leaders .) We ought to "seek only to defeat evil systems," said Martin Luther King Jr. "Individuals who happen to be caught up in that system," on the other hand, "you love."

When emotional objections to the pro-life view arise, compassion is crucial. Show compassion by affirming legitimate concerns expressed by the other person. If she thinks you're callous or indifferent, she's much less likely to consider your point of view.

For example, if someone draws attention to the difficult circumstances that many pregnant women face, agree with her wholeheartedly. Many pregnant women face enormously tough and often unfair situations. Then you can show why difficult circumstances don't justify killing (try

"trotting out the toddler") and how we can respond to these difficulties with practical support and positive alternatives to abortion.

If someone talks about cases of rape, don't just explain why abortion isn't the solution. First take time to acknowledge the evil of rape and the injustice when a woman becomes pregnant as a result. This builds rapport with the other person and shows that you’re not a moral monster. It shows that she may just want to consider what you have to say.

You might speak with an abortion supporter who has personally experienced abortion, poverty, or abuse. Her rejection of the pro-life view may be less intellectual than emotional. So ask about her experience, listen, and express sympathy when appropriate. Carefully suggest some post-abortion resources . Just as unborn children should matter to us, people hurting from abortion or other traumas should matter too.

(3) Ask questions

In addition to knowing the arguments and communicating them in a winsome manner, there's one simple dialogue technique that can make your conversations far more productive.

That technique, to borrow from Socrates and from an approach developed by Greg Koukl , is to ask questions instead of just make statements. Questions allow you to engage with others rather than lecture at them in a way that seems pushy or obnoxious.

You can use questions in three ways. First, open-ended questions help get dialogue started . Share a pro-life article on social media, for example, and ask your followers what they think about it. Or say to your friend or family member: "So I was reading an interesting article about abortion the other day. You and I have never talked about that topic. What's your take on it?"

Second, use questions to graciously make the other person explain and defend his own views. "It's often only when we’re asked to explain something that we realize whether we have answers, and whether those answers make sense," writes Stephanie Gray in her book Love Unleashes Life: Abortion and the Art of Communicating Truth . Ask the abortion supporter to clarify what he means when there is ambiguity ("What do you mean by that?"). And ask him to provide reasons in support of his claims ("Why do you think that's true?"). For example:

"You say that no one knows when life begins . Do you mean 'life' in the biological sense? (The life of a human organism begins at fertilization .) Or are you talking about when a human organism becomes valuable or has a right to life?"

"You believe a fetus is human but not a person. What do you mean by 'person'? Are you saying that there are some human beings who have no human rights?”

"You think thousands of women will die if abortion is made illegal? What evidence supports that conclusion?"

"You say abortion in the first trimester is okay, but you oppose late-term abortion? What's the difference and why do you think it matters to whether or not someone may be killed?"

Third, you can use questions in a proactive way to gently make a point or expose problems you see in the other person's view:

"I agree that women have a right to choose to do lots of things. But aren't there some things we don't have the right to do? Like things that are unjust? Isn't the question at issue whether or not abortion is one of those unjust things?"

"If an unborn child shouldn't be protected because she is not yet 'viable' (able to survive independently), wouldn't that mean that a conjoined twin who can't survive apart from the body of the other twin shouldn't be protected either?"

"You say that you wouldn't personally choose abortion but want it to remain legal for others. Why do you personally oppose it—because it kills an innocent human being? Isn't that a pretty good reason to make it illegal?"

"Since you believe in equality, doesn't that mean we all have something in common—and have it equally—that is the basis for our equality? What could that be other than our shared humanity ? And isn't a fetus also human?"

As Gray says, "Questions have power." They can lead people to think seriously about their views. And that's the context in which people sometimes come to change their minds.

We need to talk about abortion

If you do these three things—know some basics, show respect and compassion, and ask a few gracious questions—your conversations will go much smoother.

Here are a few final points of advice. First, don't force conversations. Many times and places aren't appropriate for a conversation about a sensitive topic. People aren't receptive if they feel uncomfortable or awkward. But if an opportunity arises, be ready to take advantage.

Second, you won't always know how to deal with an argument or objection, and that's fine. The best response is honesty. Just say, "That's an interesting point—I will have to think more about that. Maybe we can talk about it later, or I can email you my thoughts?" Then think through the issue and read what pro-life authors have said about it.

Third, don't expect to change someone's mind on the spot. That often doesn’t happen (especially with someone who has a firm pre-existing view). Just try to leave him with something to think about and a positive experience interacting with a pro-life person. You might also offer to continue the conversation at a later time.

Sometimes, if a person is belligerent or unwilling to listen, a real dialogue isn't even possible. In that case you might want to politely end the conversation.

Make no mistake, though: Dialogue is important. It's important because it can and does help change hearts and minds. It can and does help people reject and oppose abortion in their own lives and support legal protection for unborn children and their mothers. It can and will help make abortion culturally unthinkable.

The lives of human beings, individuals who really matter, are at stake. That's why we need to talk about abortion. And that's why we need to do it well.

This article appears in the November-December 2018 issue of NRL News.

Case for Life
Abortion Arguments

Why Biden gave a speech about abortion rights

Mara Liasson

Alejandra Marquez Janse

Sarah Handel

Roberta Rampton

Ailsa Chang

President Biden gave a speech about abortion rights Tuesday, billed as a political event ahead of the upcoming midterm elections.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

TED is supported by ads and partners 00:00

A better way to talk about abortion

storytelling
decision-making

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

Publications
Our Methods
Short Reads
Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Key facts about the abortion debate in America

A woman receives medication to terminate her pregnancy at a reproductive health clinic in Albuquerque, New Mexico, on June 23, 2022, the day before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which had guaranteed a constitutional right to an abortion for nearly 50 years.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2022 ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade – the decision that had guaranteed a constitutional right to an abortion for nearly 50 years – has shifted the legal battle over abortion to the states, with some prohibiting the procedure and others moving to safeguard it.

As the nation’s post-Roe chapter begins, here are key facts about Americans’ views on abortion, based on two Pew Research Center polls: one conducted from June 25-July 4 , just after this year’s high court ruling, and one conducted in March , before an earlier leaked draft of the opinion became public.

This analysis primarily draws from two Pew Research Center surveys, one surveying 10,441 U.S. adults conducted March 7-13, 2022, and another surveying 6,174 U.S. adults conducted June 27-July 4, 2022. Here are the questions used for the March survey , along with responses, and the questions used for the survey from June and July , along with responses.

Everyone who took part in these surveys is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. Read more about the ATP’s methodology .

A majority of the U.S. public disapproves of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe. About six-in-ten adults (57%) disapprove of the court’s decision that the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee a right to abortion and that abortion laws can be set by states, including 43% who strongly disapprove, according to the summer survey. About four-in-ten (41%) approve, including 25% who strongly approve.

A bar chart showing that the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade draws more strong disapproval among Democrats than strong approval among Republicans

About eight-in-ten Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents (82%) disapprove of the court’s decision, including nearly two-thirds (66%) who strongly disapprove. Most Republicans and GOP leaners (70%) approve , including 48% who strongly approve.

Most women (62%) disapprove of the decision to end the federal right to an abortion. More than twice as many women strongly disapprove of the court’s decision (47%) as strongly approve of it (21%). Opinion among men is more divided: 52% disapprove (37% strongly), while 47% approve (28% strongly).

About six-in-ten Americans (62%) say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, according to the summer survey – little changed since the March survey conducted just before the ruling. That includes 29% of Americans who say it should be legal in all cases and 33% who say it should be legal in most cases. About a third of U.S. adults (36%) say abortion should be illegal in all (8%) or most (28%) cases.

A line graph showing public views of abortion from 1995-2022

Generally, Americans’ views of whether abortion should be legal remained relatively unchanged in the past few years , though support fluctuated somewhat in previous decades.

Relatively few Americans take an absolutist view on the legality of abortion – either supporting or opposing it at all times, regardless of circumstances. The March survey found that support or opposition to abortion varies substantially depending on such circumstances as when an abortion takes place during a pregnancy, whether the pregnancy is life-threatening or whether a baby would have severe health problems.

While Republicans’ and Democrats’ views on the legality of abortion have long differed, the 46 percentage point partisan gap today is considerably larger than it was in the recent past, according to the survey conducted after the court’s ruling. The wider gap has been largely driven by Democrats: Today, 84% of Democrats say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, up from 72% in 2016 and 63% in 2007. Republicans’ views have shown far less change over time: Currently, 38% of Republicans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, nearly identical to the 39% who said this in 2007.

A line graph showing that the partisan gap in views of whether abortion should be legal remains wide

However, the partisan divisions over whether abortion should generally be legal tell only part of the story. According to the March survey, sizable shares of Democrats favor restrictions on abortion under certain circumstances, while majorities of Republicans favor abortion being legal in some situations , such as in cases of rape or when the pregnancy is life-threatening.

There are wide religious divides in views of whether abortion should be legal , the summer survey found. An overwhelming share of religiously unaffiliated adults (83%) say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, as do six-in-ten Catholics. Protestants are divided in their views: 48% say it should be legal in all or most cases, while 50% say it should be illegal in all or most cases. Majorities of Black Protestants (71%) and White non-evangelical Protestants (61%) take the position that abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while about three-quarters of White evangelicals (73%) say it should be illegal in all (20%) or most cases (53%).

A bar chart showing that there are deep religious divisions in views of abortion

In the March survey, 72% of White evangelicals said that the statement “human life begins at conception, so a fetus is a person with rights” reflected their views extremely or very well . That’s much greater than the share of White non-evangelical Protestants (32%), Black Protestants (38%) and Catholics (44%) who said the same. Overall, 38% of Americans said that statement matched their views extremely or very well.

Catholics, meanwhile, are divided along religious and political lines in their attitudes about abortion, according to the same survey. Catholics who attend Mass regularly are among the country’s strongest opponents of abortion being legal, and they are also more likely than those who attend less frequently to believe that life begins at conception and that a fetus has rights. Catholic Republicans, meanwhile, are far more conservative on a range of abortion questions than are Catholic Democrats.

Women (66%) are more likely than men (57%) to say abortion should be legal in most or all cases, according to the survey conducted after the court’s ruling.

More than half of U.S. adults – including 60% of women and 51% of men – said in March that women should have a greater say than men in setting abortion policy . Just 3% of U.S. adults said men should have more influence over abortion policy than women, with the remainder (39%) saying women and men should have equal say.

The March survey also found that by some measures, women report being closer to the abortion issue than men . For example, women were more likely than men to say they had given “a lot” of thought to issues around abortion prior to taking the survey (40% vs. 30%). They were also considerably more likely than men to say they personally knew someone (such as a close friend, family member or themselves) who had had an abortion (66% vs. 51%) – a gender gap that was evident across age groups, political parties and religious groups.

Relatively few Americans view the morality of abortion in stark terms , the March survey found. Overall, just 7% of all U.S. adults say having an abortion is morally acceptable in all cases, and 13% say it is morally wrong in all cases. A third say that having an abortion is morally wrong in most cases, while about a quarter (24%) say it is morally acceptable in most cases. An additional 21% do not consider having an abortion a moral issue.

A table showing that there are wide religious and partisan differences in views of the morality of abortion

Among Republicans, most (68%) say that having an abortion is morally wrong either in most (48%) or all cases (20%). Only about three-in-ten Democrats (29%) hold a similar view. Instead, about four-in-ten Democrats say having an abortion is morally acceptable in most (32%) or all (11%) cases, while an additional 28% say it is not a moral issue.

White evangelical Protestants overwhelmingly say having an abortion is morally wrong in most (51%) or all cases (30%). A slim majority of Catholics (53%) also view having an abortion as morally wrong, but many also say it is morally acceptable in most (24%) or all cases (4%), or that it is not a moral issue (17%). Among religiously unaffiliated Americans, about three-quarters see having an abortion as morally acceptable (45%) or not a moral issue (32%).

Religion & Abortion

Carrie Blazina is a former digital producer at Pew Research Center .

Cultural Issues and the 2024 Election

Support for legal abortion is widespread in many places, especially in europe, public opinion on abortion, americans overwhelmingly say access to ivf is a good thing, broad public support for legal abortion persists 2 years after dobbs, most popular.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 | Media Inquiries

Research Topics

Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Dissertation
PowerPoint Presentation
Book Report/Review
Research Proposal
Math Problems
Proofreading
Movie Review
Cover Letter Writing
Personal Statement
Nursing Paper
Argumentative Essay
Research Paper
Discussion Board Post

Tips for Creating Impressive Persuasive Speeches on Abortion

Table of Contents

Speech is a great way to persuade someone that your position or viewpoint on a specific topic is correct and reasonable. But, creating a good persuasive speech is a challenging task. Especially, when you chose such a controversial topic as abortion.

There are a lot of questions about abortion and they are constantly discussed in society. Debates over abortion touches on different aspects like religious viewpoints, the legality of this procedure, and its morality. And to create a good-quality abortion persuasive essay , you need to know about all key points, rules, and best writing practices.

In this article, you will find all information about writing persuasive speeches on abortion. We will tell you about each step and share some useful tips. Keep reading to learn more!

Preparing an Abortion Persuasive Speech : Essential Steps

The process of writing any persuasive speech includes several steps. And all of them are equally important if you want to craft the best speech possible. Speaking of abortion persuasive essay writing, here are the steps you need to follow to prepare an exceptional speech:

Research the topic. Before you decide what position to take in your speech, you need to learn as much information as possible about abortion and look at it from different viewpoints.
Choose your side. Basically, there are only two sides you can choose from — so-called pro-life and pro-choice. The first side argues against abortion, and another side argues in favor of abortion as a legal right for every woman.
Create a thesis statement for your abortion persuasive essay .
Outline your speech. Write down all the points you want to communicate in your speech and organize them. Find the strongest arguments from all your ideas and use only them. Weak points will not help you to create a good persuasive essay.
Create the first draft. We will talk about each part of a persuasive essay structure later in this article.
Revise your speech and edit it. Polish your first draft by changing sentences, removing mistakes, and checking the logical sequence of all points. Repeat the process as many times as needed to create a flawless final draft.

How to Start a Persuasive Speech on Abortion

The best way to start your abortion persuasive speech is with an attention grabber. It can be interesting statistics, or an intriguing question, that will make the audience keep listening to you.

After the first sentence, you need to move to your thesis statement. Basically, you will argue for or against abortion and you need to clearly state it in your thesis. But, it is also important to provide the key point why you chose one side and not another. Use one sentence between the attention grabber and your thesis statement to ensure a smooth transition.

How to Present Arguments in a Persuasive Speech About Abortions

Now, let’s talk about the main part of your abortion persuasive essay — argumentation. Basically, the less you write, the better. The meaning is you need to remove all unnecessary information from your speech. Provide short, precise facts and arguments, without deviating from your main point. Every argument should be formulated in powerful sentences that will hit your listeners and make them think critically.

The best way is to present an argument and back it up with a few facts or statistics. If you think that your argument can be unclear, make sure you add one more sentence to better explain your point. Once you communicate one point, move to the next one, that is logically connected to your previous point.

Don’t try to present all your arguments in one speech. Choose no more than 3-4 arguments, and make sure they are the strongest ones. Otherwise, your listener will be bored with the length of your abortion persuasive speech and unconvinced of the validity of your position.

How to End an Abortion Persuasive Speech

The conclusion is extremely important in a persuasive speech. It is the last chance to reinforce your point of view. So, if you want to impress the listeners and make them consider your position, you need to choose the right words for your concluding sentences.

First, you can summarize your arguments, just to remind the listeners of your key points. It should be a short sentence where you just repeat all points one by one. And after this, you need to make a final statement.

There are a lot of options for how you can make it, and everything depends on what arguments you presented earlier. One of the most interesting ways is to end with a question that will make people doubt their position if it is opposite to yours.

Persuasive Speech About Abortion : Key Points to Know

We have already told you enough about the process of writing an abortion persuasive essay . But, the same with any type of essay, a persuasive speech has its special features. Here are some key points to remember if you truly want to persuade people of your viewpoint on abortion:

As people usually listen to speeches, not read them, there is no place for abstract phrases and deviations from the topic. A persuasive speech should be precise, clear, and contain powerful statements and arguments.
Use simple language, as people usually become less interested when hearing sophisticated words. No need to speak with too complicated phrases.
Your words can be emotional and passionate. It will help to strengthen your message and evoke emotions among your listeners. Using formal, dry language in an abortion persuasive essay is not effective at all.

Final Thoughts

We have covered all essential points in writing a speech about abortion. Now, it’s time for you to get to work and create a persuasive speech. We hope our guide will help you with this task.

And remember, despite the fact that persuasive speech should persuade people, it rarely works like that. One speech is not enough to make a person immediately change their opinion on abortion. But, a good persuasive speech indeed can influence people and get them thinking further. And it should be your goal when writing an abortion persuasive essay.

Ideas on writing an excellent Baseball essay

55 Rare Topics For Persuasive Essays

How To Write Your Best Alcoholism Essay?

Find anything you save across the site in your account

A High School Teen’s Powerful Graduation Speech About Abortion Rights Is Going Viral

Paxton Smith, the 2021 valedictorian of Lake Highlands High School in Dallas, gave an impassioned graduation speech about abortion rights that's going viral.

For those unfamiliar with what's happening in Texas: The state's governor, Greg Abbott, just signed into law the “heartbeat bill,” which, per The Texas Tribune , bans abortions as early as six weeks into a pregnancy, when most women don't even realize they're expecting.

Smith had originally planned to talk about television and media during her speech but instead used the platform to shed light on the “heartbeat bill.”

“In light of recent events, it feels wrong to talk about anything but what is currently affecting me and millions of other women in this state,” Smith said, per Vox . “Starting in September, there will be a ban on abortion after six weeks of pregnancy, regardless of whether the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest. Six weeks. That’s all women get.”

According to Vox, the “heartbeat bill” not only bans abortion after six weeks of pregnancy but allows people to sue anyone who “aids and abets” one of these illegal procedures.

Smith's speech has exploded on TikTok, racking up more than 210,000 views. It was reposted to Twitter, where it's been viewed more than 2 million times. “In Texas, Lake Highlands High School valedictorian, Paxton Smith, switched out her approved speech to talk about abortion rights,” the tweet reads.

This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.

According to Advocate magazine, a local Highlands publication, Smith's decision to change her speech on the fly was not supported by her school district. “The content of each student speaker’s message is the private, voluntary expression of the individual student and does not reflect the endorsement, sponsorship, position, or expression of the District or its employees,” RISD school board president Karen Clardy said. “What the student did was unexpected and not supported by LHHS or RISD. We are going to review student speech protocols in advance of next year’s graduations to prevent something like this from happening again.”

That being said, Smith's father, Russell, fully supported her actions. “It was something that she felt was important, and she had the nerve, determination, and boldness to put herself out there and say her piece,” he said, according to Advocate . “So few people demonstrate this level of maturity and poise, regardless of age.”

Read her full speech, according to Advocate magazine, below:

As we leave high school we need to make our voices heard. I was going to get up here and talk to you about TV and content and media because those are things that are very important to me. However, in light of recent events, it feels wrong to talk about anything but what is currently affecting me and millions of other women in this state.

Recently the heartbeat bill was passed in Texas. Starting in September, there will be a ban on abortions that take place after six weeks of pregnancy, regardless of whether the pregnancy was a result of rape or incest. Six weeks. Most women don’t even realize they’re pregnant by then. And so, before they have the time to decide if they are emotionally, physically, and financially stable enough to carry out a full-term pregnancy, before they have the chance to decide if they can take on the responsibility of bringing another human into the world, the decision has been made for them by a stranger. A decision that will affect the rest of their lives.

I have dreams, hopes, and ambitions. Every girl here does. We have spent our whole lives working towards our futures, and without our consent or input, our control over our futures has been stripped away from us. I am terrified that if my contraceptives fail me, that if I’m raped, then my hopes and efforts and dreams for myself will no longer be relevant. I hope you can feel how gut-wrenching it is, how dehumanizing it is, to have the autonomy over your own body taken from you.

And I’m talking about this today, on a day as important as this, on a day honoring the students’ efforts in 12 years of schooling, on a day where we’re all brought together, on a day where you will be the most inclined to hear a voice like mine, a woman’s voice, to tell you that this is a problem. A problem that can’t wait. I refuse to give up this platform to promote complacency and peace, when there is a war on my body and a war on my rights. A war on the rights of your sisters, a war on the rights of your mothers, a war on the rights of your daughters.

We cannot stay silent.

Why Freedom of Speech Is the Next Abortion Fight

A legal battle in Mississippi will test whether states can criminalize those who merely provide information.

A black-and-white photo of a protester silhouetted in front of the U.S. Supreme Court

I n the middle of July, three big blue billboards went up in and around Jackson, Mississippi. Pregnant? You still have a choice , they informed passing motorists, inviting them to visit Mayday.Health to learn more. Anybody who did landed on a website that provides information about at-home abortion pills and ways to get them delivered anywhere in the United States—including parts of the country, such as Mississippi, where abortions are now illegal under most circumstances.

A few days ago, the founders of the nonprofit that paid for the billboard ads, Mayday Health , received a subpoena from the office of the attorney general of Mississippi. (The state has already been at the center of recent debates about abortion: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization , the ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade , upheld a Mississippi statute by allowing states to put strict limits on abortion.) The subpoena, which I have seen , demands a trove of documents about Mayday Health and its activities. It may be the first step in an effort to force Mayday Health to take down the billboards, or even to prosecute the organization’s leaders for aiding and abetting criminal conduct.

Mayday Health is not backing down. This week, it is taking out a television ad on Mississippi channels and putting up 20 additional billboards. This makes the legal fight over the Jackson billboards a crucial test in two interrelated conflicts about abortion that are still coming into public view.

Read: The abortion-rights message that some activists hate

The first is that the availability of abortion pills, which are very safe and effective during the first three months of pregnancy, has transformed the stakes of the abortion fight . The pro-life movement has hoped that states’ new powers to shut down abortion providers will radically reduce the number of abortions around the country. The pro-choice movement has feared that the end of Roe will lead to a resurgence of back-alley abortions that seriously threaten women’s health.

Yet the changes wrought by the recent Supreme Court ruling may turn out to be more contained than meets the eye: Legal restrictions on first-trimester abortions have become much harder to enforce because a simple pill can now be used to induce a miscarriage. Abortion by medication is widely available in large parts of the country; as Mayday Health points out on its website, even women who are residents in states where doctors cannot prescribe such pills can set up a temporary forwarding address and obtain them by mail.

The second brewing conflict is about limits on free speech. So long as abortions required an in-person medical procedure, the pro-life movement could hope to reduce them by shutting down local clinics offering the service. Now that comparatively cheap and convenient workarounds exist for most cases, effective curbs on abortion require the extra step of preventing people from finding out about these alternatives. That is putting many members of the pro-life movement, be they Mississippi’s attorney general or Republican legislators in several states who are trying to pass draconian restrictions on information and advice about abortions, on a collision course with the First Amendment.

S ome limits on speech are reasonable. States do, for example, have a legitimate interest in banning advertisements for illegal drugs. If a cocaine dealer took out a billboard advertising his wares, the government should obviously be able to take it down. Especially when it comes to commercial speech, some common-sense restrictions on what people can say or claim have always existed and are well-justified.

But the laws that Republicans are now introducing in state legislatures around the country go far beyond such narrow limits on objectionable commercial speech. In South Carolina, for example, Republican legislators have recently sponsored a bill that would criminalize “providing information to a pregnant woman, or someone seeking information on behalf of a pregnant woman, by telephone, internet, or any other mode of communication regarding self-administered abortions or the means to obtain an abortion, knowing that the information will be used, or is reasonably likely to be used, for an abortion.”

Read: The coming rise of abortion as a crime

This law—which is modeled on draft legislation that the National Right to Life Committee is trying to get passed in many states around the country—would seriously undermine the right to free speech. It could potentially make doctors in states where abortion is actually legal liable to prosecution for discussing their services with someone who calls them from a state where abortion is illegal. It could even outlaw basic forms of speech such as news stories containing information that might be used by someone seeking an abortion. Theoretically, even this article could fall under that proscription.

The subpoena issued by the office of Mississippi’s attorney general is objectionable for similar reasons. Mayday Health is not advertising a commercial product or service. The organization does not handle or distribute abortion pills. All it does is provide information. Although one could reasonably believe that the information Mayday Health is providing may be used to commit acts that are now illegal in some parts of the United States, a ban on informational speech that can be used for the purposes of lawbreaking would be unacceptably broad and vague. After all, would-be lawbreakers might also consult the blog posts of lawyers who explain how to object to an improper search of a vehicle or study the pages of a novel to figure out how to make a Molotov cocktail. Should the attorney or the novelist also be considered to have aided or abetted a crime?

Recent efforts to suppress speech about abortion would seriously undermine the nation’s ability to debate the topic openly and honestly. Anybody who believes in the importance of the First Amendment should oppose them. As Will Creeley, the legal director of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, has pointed out , “These proposals are a chilling attempt to stifle free speech … Whether you agree with abortion or not is irrelevant. You have the right to talk about it.”

I n recent years , the wider debate about free speech has undergone a strange transformation. Historically, the American left staunchly defended the First Amendment because it recognized the central part that free speech played in the struggles against slavery and segregation, and in the fight for the rights of women and sexual minorities. But as establishment institutions, including universities and corporations, became more progressive, and parts of the left came to feel that they had a significant share in institutional power, the absolute commitment to free speech waned.

Progressives started to find the idea of restrictions on free speech appealing because they assumed that those making decisions about what to allow and what to ban would share their views and values. Today, some on the extremist left endorse restrictions on free speech, demanding campus speech codes and measures to force social-media sites to “deplatform” controversial commentators and censor what they claim is “misinformation.”

Mary Ziegler: Why exceptions for the life of the mother have disappeared

The transformation of the left’s position on freedom of speech has allowed both principled conservatives and the less-than-principled protagonists of the MAGA movement to cast themselves as defenders of the First Amendment. In the mind of many people, the cause of free speech has astoundingly quickly shifted from being associated with left-wing organizations such as the ACLU to becoming the property of right-leaning pundits and politicians.

This makes the new front in the fight over abortion rights an important reminder of why the left should never abandon the cause of free speech. If the left gives up on the core commitment to free speech, what people can say is as likely to be determined by the attorney general of Mississippi as it is by college deans or tech workers. Curbs on free expression have always been a tool of governments that seek to control the lives of their citizens and punish those who defy them. The same remains true today.

Our privacy statement has changed. Changes effective July 1, 2024.

Abortion is Our Right, and We Won’t Be Silenced

If you thought anti-abortion extremists were going to stop at banning abortion, punishing pregnant people, and allowing bounty hunters to sue abortion providers, you’d be wrong. Politicians across the country have proposed bills taking aim at our right to discuss abortion care, to express the benefits of being able to determine if and when to become pregnant, and even to create art about reproductive health care. They’re continuing their attacks on our reproductive freedom by going after our right to free speech and our access to life-saving information. This isn’t just about taking away people’s decisions during pregnancy; politicians are trying to erase our health care needs, our stories and experiences, and our existence.

Bills in Iowa and Texas were recently introduced that force internet providers to block websites that give information about abortion and allow anyone to sue an internet provider who fails to block those websites. In order to avoid the risk of lawsuits, internet service providers — which may even include places that supply internet access like colleges and libraries — would be forced to block any website that discusses abortion, including those of abortion funds working around the clock to make sure pregnant people know their options for accessing abortion and where they may need to travel. The Texas law even targets specific websites that would have to be blocked, some of which are simply sites to get educational information about abortion pills and their safety. Anti-abortion extremists are clearly aiming to ensure people who need abortions in their state can’t even learn about their options.

At the same time as states are trying to shut down access to information about abortion, public colleges are responding to legislative attacks from extremist politicians by curtailing free speech and artistic expression — even going beyond the bounds of the law out of fear they may face political punishment. Last summer, for example, Indiana University told faculty that they had committed a policy violation by writing a letter in support of a colleague and opposing a proposed abortion ban in the legislature.

More recently, Lewis-Clark State College announced that it would pull several artists pieces addressing abortion from an upcoming exhibition, “Unconditional Care,” for fear of violating the state’s No Public Funds for Abortion Act. A far cry from providing unconditional care to its community, the college is censoring work that gives voice to a range of topics that are often heavily stigmatized and rarely spoken about.

An Idaho College Censored Their Reproductive Health Care Art, But These Artists Won’t be Silenced

Three artists whose work was removed from an exhibit at Lewis-Clark State College speak out about attempts to silence stories about abortion.

Source: American Civil Liberties Union

We know that freedom of speech, artistic expression, and reproductive freedom go hand in hand. We must be allowed to talk about our experiences and exchange information about our health care in order to truly make decisions about our bodies and our families free from political interference. We cannot allow extremist politicians to get in between us and the information we need, or to tell us what we can and can’t say — online or off.

The ACLU is fighting in courts and state legislatures across the country to stop bills like these (and many more), but we need you to stand with us. Whether you live in a state where politicians are taking away your free speech and abortion rights or not, you can make a difference in this fight. Join the ACLU in fighting back against attacks on abortion access and other civil liberties across the country by signing up for information and ways to take action below.

Learn More About the Issues on This Page

Reproductive Freedom
Free Speech

The Supreme Court Just Declined to Protect Emergency Abortion Care for Pregnant Patients. Here’s What to Know

Supreme Court Declines to Protect Pregnant People’s Right to Emergency Care

ACLU Statement on Leaked Supreme Court Decision in Emergency Abortion Case

ACLU Announces Plan to Combat Nationwide Abortion Ban and Other Attacks on Reproductive Health Care Under a Second Trump Term

Hardest Speech: Lawmakers Now Speaking Out About Own Abortions

For Ohio state representative Teresa Fedor, that moment came this March, as she listened to her fellow lawmakers debate a bill that would forbid abortions once a heartbeat is detected, which can sometimes be as early as six weeks. A former schoolteacher who’s served in the legislature since 2002, she says she knew it was time to tell her own story.

“I knew when I decided to stand up, there was no looking back,” she says. Fedor, 59, began indirectly, noting that she had not heard any discussion of exceptions for rape. She said she respected her opponents’ reasoning. And then, a minute into her speech, she stunned her colleagues.

“You don’t respect my reason—my rape, my abortion,” she said, her voice growing louder. “What you’re doing is so fundamentally inhuman, unconstitutional, and I’ve sat here too long.”

It was a rare moment of personal drama on the floor, but one that has become more common from both sides as the fight over abortion moves from Capitol Hill to statehouses. Hundreds of abortion restrictions have been introduced in state legislatures since the 2010 elections, when anti-abortion conservatives gained majorities in many state governments. States’ efforts to enact the Affordable Care Act, passed in 2010, has also reignited the debate, as legislatures grapple with how to provide reproductive care with taxpayer money. According to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health think tank, 231 abortion restrictions have been enacted on the state level in the last four years, compared to 189 restrictions over the previous 10 years combined. The Center for Reproductive Rights, a non-profit advocacy group promoting access to abortion and contraception, has tallied more than 330 reproductive health restrictions introduced so far in 2015, making this one of the most active years on record.

As these debates intensify, more female lawmakers are publicly airing their own histories in support of abortion and in opposition to it. “We’ve definitely noticed an uptick, and part of that is the more restrictions that are passed, the more personal it becomes, and that really compels people to share something personal in response to that,” says Kelly Baden, director of state advocacy for the Center for Reproductive Rights.

Both sides are encouraging women to speak up. “We wouldn’t be having this debate if there weren’t anguish at the root of the problem,” says Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, a group dedicated to getting more anti-abortion women elected to office. “There wouldn’t be any anguish if this was an appendectomy.”

The trend of statehouse revelations may have started with Texas lawmaker Wendy Davis, who drew national attention in 2013 when she mounted an 11-hour filibuster against a state bill that would impose tight restrictions. But it wasn’t until the following year, in the middle of an unsuccessful run for governor, that she revealed in an autobiography that she had undergone two abortions.

Most of the women who have spoken publicly about their abortions are pro-choice, since women opposed to abortion are of course less likely to have one. But Molly White, a 57-year-old freshman Texas lawmaker who has spoken publicly about her two abortions, ran for office specifically to keep other women from the abortion table. “It’s a choice that I deeply regret, that deeply hurt me, and I hurt others because I was hurt,” she says. “The first thing I wanted to do as an elected member was craft a coerced abortion prevention bill.”

None of women in this story said they spoke up as part of an orchestrated movement towards reproductive transparency. Instead, many said they did it because they were angry: angry at the proposed restrictions, angry at male lawmakers opining about women’s health and angry at their colleagues who talked about abortion as an abstract evil rather than a lived experience. “I had so much rage,” said Arizona state representative Victoria Steele, 58, who told her personal story in March. “How dare they do this without any regard for women’s lives?

THE REVELATIONS Lucy Flores hadn’t planned to speak at all on the day she told her fellow lawmakers about her abortion. Earlier that day, a colleague had sent Flores a text message asking for some last-minute support on a bill that would revamp comprehensive sex education. “I was walking towards the hearing room, and that’s when I thought to myself, ‘Should I bring up my choice to have an abortion?’” she says. Previously in the same session in 2013, Flores, 35 and at that time a member of the Nevada Assembly, had revealed to her colleagues that she was a survivor of domestic abuse. “I thought, ‘I’ve shared so much this session, I’ll just go ahead and tell you some more,’” she says.

Flores is the rare lawmaker to publicly talk about choosing to have an abortion that was not because of medical concerns or because she had been raped. She got pregnant at 16, right after she had finished juvenile parole for driving a stolen car, evading a cop, and violating probation. She looked at her sisters struggling to raise their children on public assistance, and knew she didn’t want to go down that road. “I went to my dad and I had to ask him for the money so I could go get an abortion,” she recalls, “And having that conversation with my dad was one of the most difficult things I’ve ever done in my life.”

“I don’t regret it,” she said in her testimony to the Assembly Education Committee, as she wiped away tears. “I’m here making a difference…for other young ladies.”

Arizona state representative Victoria Steele didn’t get an abortion. But in March she revealed a different secret while testifying in committee against a bill that would make it harder for women to get abortion coverage through the Affordable Care Act. “I was asked a question in a very nasty way. The question was: ‘So, representative Steele, do you think abortion is a medical service?’ with this air of incredulity,” she says. That’s what prompted her to reveal that she had been molested and raped by a male relative for many years. And though she did not get pregnant, other victims of the same abuser did.

“One of [the other victims had asked their attacker] ‘What if I get pregnant?’ and he told her ‘Don’t worry, we’ll just stick a pencil up there and take care of it.’ And another one got pregnant, and she ended up having to go to the emergency room at the hospital because she nearly died from an illegal abortion,” she said.

Abortion restrictions that exempt rape and incest put victims in a vulnerable position, Steele says. “Can you imagine being raped and being pregnant and wanting to get an abortion and having to explain to your insurance company that you are eligible for an exemption?” she said. “What if they don’t believe you, what if there’s no police report, what if you didn’t report it? Can you imagine how re-traumatizing that would be?” She calls the Arizona legislation, which passed two weeks after her testimony, a “cruel joke.”

Steele says her only regret is that she did not have more time to ready her thoughts. “If I had had a chance to be prepared, I would have done it without crying.”

White remembers leaving the clinic a “walking dead woman” after her second abortion. She says her family coerced her into aborting a baby she wanted to keep and her doctor performed the unwanted abortion for financial gain. She opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest, and regularly speaks about the devastation she says it has wrought on her life. To White, a rape victim aborting her pregnancy is just perpetuating a cycle of violence. “She was a victim of a violent crime, and then after her abortion she feels like she’s committed a violent crime against her child,” she says. “The trauma of a rape is not healed by the trauma of an abortion.”

White ran for office specifically to prevent other women from choosing abortion. She’s the state leader for Operation Outcry, a national support network for people hurt by abortions. After speaking to hundreds of women, including rape victims, she concluded that “every woman that aborted her child regretted it,” and if they don’t regret it, they’re in denial. Her bill to criminalize abortion coercion is her first act as an elected representative.

On the other side of the issue is North Carolina representative Tricia Cotham, 36. She testified in April against a bill that would enforce a 72-hour waiting period before all abortions. “I heard the shaming of women,” she said. “It was portrayed that women just run to the bank, grab a latte at Starbucks, and have an abortion and do their thing.” She said she went home and wrote out her speech describing the induced physician-assisted abortion of her non-viable fetus.

“I knew that I was not going to change the minds of those who were going to vote yes. And it wasn’t about them,” she said. Instead, she said, she spoke so “somebody out there could feel maybe not feel shamed.”

Only one member of Congress has ever talked about her own abortion on the House floor. In 2011, U.S. Rep. Jackie Speier of California, 65, talked about how her unborn baby had slipped out of her uterus decades earlier, a complication that threatened her life and forced her to get a second-trimester abortion.

“One of my Republican colleagues was reading from a book about a second-trimester abortion, and he started reading an excerpt where it talks about how they were sawing off the limbs of the fetus,” she said. “It just sent me into orbit.”

“I had really planned to speak about something else,” she started when she took the floor to argue against a budget amendment that would defund Planned Parenthood, a measure that was later defeated in the Senate. “I’m one of those women he spoke about just now… the procedure that you just talked about was a procedure that I endured.”

“I lost a baby,” she continued. “But for you to stand on this floor and to suggest as you have that somehow this is a procedure that is welcomed or done cavalierly or done without any thought is preposterous. Last time I checked, abortions are legal in this country.”

The effect on her colleague was immediate, Speier recalls. “Someone said to me afterwards, ‘he was like a deer in the headlights.’”

THE REACTION Revealing your abortion rarely elicits mass public support. Some of these women were flooded with hate mail and death threats. “It was one of the worst experiences of my entire life,” says Nevada’s Flores of the initial response. “I wasn’t sure if I walked out of that legislative building if there was going to be some crazy person who was ready to shoot me and kill me.”

Representative Fedor says she saw one of her Republican colleagues laughing during her testimony. “I don’t appreciate that,” she said in her speech, “and it happens to be a man who’s laughing.” Fedor says she got her abortion after she was raped while serving in the military in her 20s.

“I’ve had people flip me off, I’ve had people swerve at me” in their cars, North Carolina’s Cotham says, recalling that a Republican colleague came up to her and called her a “baby-killer,” after the session adjourned.

But many say they were surprised by the level of support from across the aisle. Flores said that when a Republican colleague got a nasty email calling her “trash” and suggesting she be thrown out of the legislature, his staffer came to her office in tears because she was so upset about the backlash.

“They wrote back saying, ‘That kind of language will not be tolerated, that is our legislative colleague duly elected by the representatives of her district,’” Flores said.

Others learned that their fellow lawmakers had carried similar burdens in secret. “I had colleagues, female members who came up to me afterwards,” said Speier. “They said, ‘Jackie, I had one too, but I never could have spoken about it on the House floor.’”

For Cotham, the response from her colleagues and constituents wasn’t as important as the change her testimony made in her own life. “I left there, and I felt like 100 pounds had come off of me. I could not believe how alive I felt afterwards,” she says. “Kind of like: ‘Don’t mess with me.’”

THE FALLOUT Powerful as the personal testimonies were, they did not change the politics–on either side.

Steele’s testimony was intended to stop an Arizona bill that makes it harder for women to elect for abortion coverage through Affordable Care Act health plans, among other restrictions. That bill passed two weeks after she spoke out against it, and was subsequently signed into law.

Molly White’s bill to criminalize abortion coercion was sent back to the drawing board in order to bolster the legal language. Anti-abortion groups supported the idea of White’s bill, which included an extended waiting period for coerced abortions, but raised concerns about its ability to withstand legal challenges from pro-choice groups.

Cotham spoke out against a North Carolina bill that would require 72-hour waiting periods to get an abortion. That bill passed and was signed into law in June, making North Carolina the fourth state to enact such a long waiting period.

The budget amendment to defund Planned Parenthood passed the U.S. House of Representatives despite Speier’s testimony, although it later failed in the Senate. And the fetal heart-rate bill that Fedor opposed passed the Ohio House and is currently being debated in the state Senate.

Still, those who have done it are encouraging more women come forward about their abortions. “I think for women who are weighing whether or not they should speak out, I think we have an obligation to do so,” says Speier. “Because it’s got to come out from the shadows.”

“I don’t think I had emotionally moved on,” says Cotham. “The real healing came that day on the floor.”

Your browser is out of date. Please update your browser at http://update.microsoft.com

About Search

Nikki Haley

Remarks delivering a policy speech on abortion in arlington, virginia.

Thank you, Marjorie. And thank you to the Susan B. Anthony List for its tireless work on behalf of innocent children and moms.

My subject today is the conversation around abortion. It's a sensitive topic that deserves our attention. It's one that too many politicians either demagogue or hide from. I won't demagogue or hide from it.

I'm here to speak about it directly and openly. I won't address every possible question or angle. Rather, I aim to start a constructive conversation about where we go from here in our divided country.

Abortion is a deeply personal topic for both women and men. I understand why. Someone's body and someone else's life are not things to be taken lightly, and they should not be politicized. The issue should be addressed with sensitivity and respect, not judgment and hate.

Most people have a story that has brought them to their views about abortion. It could be a personal experience. It could be a trauma that a family member or friend endured. It could be a moral conviction. It could be our concerns for our daughters and their future.

This is my story.

I am pro-life. I am unapologetic and unhesitant about it. Not because the Republican Party tells me to be. But for very personal reasons.

My husband was adopted, and I am reminded of that blessing every day.

Michael's birth parents lived in poverty. His father was an alcoholic and in and out of prison. His mother suffered a traumatic brain injury.

When he was just a few years old, Michael and his siblings were taken from their home. Later, they were put in foster care. It was a rough experience for him.

Thankfully, when he was four, a loving family adopted Michael and his younger sister. It changed their lives. Adoption literally saved them.

Every day is a blessing because someone gave him life. Every day is a blessing because a family loved and raised him under difficult circumstances. The world is better because of Michael Haley. He's an amazing father and husband. He's a combat veteran who served our country in war. He continues to help adoption and at-risk youth causes because he wants to help others who were born in his situation.

I often think about what would have happened if Michael hadn't been so blessed … if his biological mother had chosen a different path.

My husband is reason number one that I stand for life. Every day I get to spend with the love of my life reminds me that I am blessed that someone saved his life.

The second reason is that Michael and I struggled to have children of our own.

I had many challenges as a teenager into my college years. I went through numerous surgeries. When Michael and I were married, I couldn't wait to be a mom. But what happened so easily for many of my friends was not my path. We went through countless sessions of fertility treatments.

Every day I wake up and see or speak to my two children I feel blessed. The greatest job I will ever have is being their mom.

Our eldest got married just ten days ago. I will never forget the day she was born and then seeing her walk down the wedding aisle with her dad. I felt what countless parents feel. Love. Pride. Overpowering joy.

I believe every life is a blessing from God. My heart hurts when someone decides not to go through with a pregnancy.

My record on abortion is long and clear.

As a state legislator, I voted for every pro-life bill that came before me.

We made it easier for women to get ultrasounds.

We required a 24-hour wait before abortions.

As Governor, we passed the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, protecting babies born during botched abortions.

I signed a law protecting unborn babies from the moment they can feel pain.

We also launched initiatives that paired thousands of vulnerable first-time moms with nurses who had specialized training in maternal and child health.

I kept up the fight as ambassador to the United Nations.

And I'm not done yet.

My goal as president will be the same as when I was Governor and Ambassador.

I want to save as many lives and help as many moms as possible.

This mission has become more urgent in the past year.

With the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision, we entered a new era. It's really a return to the way this issue was decided in our country for nearly two centuries.

Until 1973, abortion was not a federal issue. Each state decided where it stood. Many had restrictive laws. Some had more permissive laws.

Yes, the issue was controversial, but the citizens of each state reached a consensus that reflected their values.

Then, in 1973, the Supreme Court changed that. It declared the entire nation must follow one standard. A standard determined not by the American people, but by unelected judges. And that standard was among the most liberal in the world.

Overnight, 46 states saw their abortion laws thrown out. State-level consensus was replaced with a national mandate that much of the country found deeply offensive.

Last year, the Court returned power to the American people. We are now free to forge consensus once again.

In the past year, we've started to see what that looks like.

Some states have passed laws protecting life. I commend them for it.

Other states have doubled down on abortion. I wish that weren't the case, but it is.

Different people in different places are taking different paths. That's what the founders of our country envisioned. It's the reality of living in a democracy.

But it's equally true that in a democracy, things can change. Tomorrow can be better than today. And I believe we will make even more progress in the cause of life.

That is the challenge we face as pro-life advocates – to move America toward life.

I said I want to save as many lives and help as many moms as possible. That is my goal. To do that at the federal level, the next president must find national consensus.

That might sound strange to many people.

Under Roe, consensus was replaced by demonization. And let's be honest: most in the media promote demonization. They stoke division pitting Americans against each other.

No one talks about finding consensus. Everyone goes to the barricades and attacks the other side.

They've turned a sensitive issue that has long divided people into a kind of gotcha bidding war.

How many weeks are you for? How many exceptions are you for? And so on. But these questions miss the point if the goal is saving as many lives as possible.

You don't save any lives if you can't enact your position into law. And you can't do that unless you find consensus.

Reaching consensus starts with humanizing, not demonizing. Just like I have my story, I respect everyone who has their story. I don't judge someone who is pro-choice any more than I want them to judge me for being pro-life.

Today, each state is finding its own consensus, as they should.

Nationally, however, the task is much harder. As a practical matter, you only achieve consensus when you have a House majority, a 60-vote Senate majority, and a president who are all in alignment.

We are nowhere close to reaching that point. Today, there are around 45 pro-life senators, depending on how you count them. There haven't been 60 Republican senators since 1910. It could happen one day. But it hasn't happened in over a hundred years, and it's unlikely to happen soon.

We have to face this reality. The pro-life laws that have passed in strongly Republican states will not be approved at the federal level.

That's just a fact, notwithstanding what the Democrat fearmongers say. They say Republicans are about to ban all abortions nationwide and send women to prison. These wildly false claims, amplified by a sympathetic media, are not designed to do anything other than score political points.

They know as well as anyone that no Republican president will have the ability to ban abortion nationwide, just as no Democratic president can override the laws of all fifty states. It's just not going to happen.

But that does not mean we can't save as many lives as possible.

I do believe there is a federal role on abortion. Whether we can save more lives nationally depends entirely on doing what no one has done to date – finding consensus. That's what I will strive to do.

In fact, I believe common ground already exists.

There is broad public agreement that babies born during a failed abortion deserve to live. They need medical care and the full protection of the law, just like every other baby.

There is broad public agreement that we should never pressure moms into having an abortion. They should get support to carry their baby to term. They should be able to get information from pregnancy resource centers – and especially about adoption.

We must do better when it comes to adoption, to make it easier for adoptive parents, and to avoid children growing up in a government system with too little love.

We can broadly agree that pro-life doctors and nurses should never be forced to violate their beliefs. The right of conscience matters just as much as the right to life.

Surely, we can all agree that abortion up until the time of birth is a bridge too far. Only seven countries on earth allow elective late-term abortions. We're talking brutal regimes like Communist China and North Korea.

We should be able to agree that contraception should be more available, not less.

And we can all agree that women who get abortions should not be jailed. A few have even called for the death penalty. That's the least pro-life position I can possibly imagine.

Those are just some areas where national consensus is already within reach. There are others too, and we should do the hard work to find them through heartfelt dialogue.

Sadly, finding consensus is the last thing on the mind of many of today's political and media class.

Conflict makes for good fundraising copy and scary TV ads. Consensus doesn't get a lot of ratings or clicks.

Hating and judging each other has become the norm instead of respecting one's personal story.

I would remind those on the Left who demonize anyone who is pro-life, that it was not too long ago when President Bill Clinton said he wanted abortion to be "safe, legal, and rare."

Few Democrats say "rare" anymore.

Just the opposite. Many want legal abortion anytime, for any reason, at any stage of pregnancy, in every state and town in America.

Some radical activists are even lighting pregnancy resource centers on fire. These are not the voices of consensus. They are acts of division and hatred.

President Biden has done nothing to discourage it. In fact, he promotes it. That's not leadership. It's more partisanship of the worst kind.

Pro-life political leaders and candidates must not put up with being demonized. We should call out the extremism of the Left.

We don't need a president who endangers lives while dividing our country even more. We need a president who unites Americans and brings out the best in them, even on the toughest of subjects.

That will be my approach as president. I believe in conversation.

I believe in compassion.

I believe in empathy, not anger.

We're not just talking about policy here. We're talking about people.

That's often lost in this debate, on the left and the right. But it's front of mind for me.

I acknowledge the humanity of both the unborn baby and the pregnant mom.

I know how hard pregnancy can be.

Some days, you're so sick you can't get out of bed. You worry if you're really up for raising a baby. And you know you're going to need a lot of help.

That's what I felt during my pregnancies. Many women have it much harder. I desperately wanted a child. I had a loving family eager to help out. But some moms never wanted to be pregnant at all. Some are single with no one to help – with no idea how to raise a baby while keeping a job.

I had a friend who was raped. I know the anguish she went through worrying that she would have an unwanted pregnancy. It was an anguish I wouldn't wish on anyone.

We can't ignore the fears those women face.

I will never downplay these difficulties as I fight for life. And I won't demonize those who disagree with me.

We can't give into outrage culture and accuse our opponents of being evil. That's self- defeating.

If we want to protect more moms and save more babies, we need more Americans to join with us. We must persuade people and find consensus, not push them further away.

I know we can do it.

I've done it before.

Eight years ago, when I was governor, I encountered the most difficult challenge of my life.

A sick and twisted young man walked into Mother Emanuel Church, in Charleston. He joined a bible study of African Americans, sat and prayed with them for over an hour, then opened fire. He murdered nine amazing souls. He openly said he did it because of the color of their skin.

In the awful days that followed, photos emerged of the killer posing with the Confederate Flag. Amid our grief, a massive debate broke out. It centered on the Confederate Flag that flew on the grounds of the South Carolina statehouse.

Our state had been bitterly divided on the flag for decades. On one side were those who wanted to tear it down. On the other side were those who wanted to keep the flag. Both were united in sadness over the Mother Emanuel murders. But they were divided about what the flag meant, and what taking it down would mean.

The debate was intense. People wondered if South Carolina would break out in violence and destruction like what we had recently seen in Ferguson, Missouri and other places.

But we didn't.

In that fraught moment, I gave a speech. I said, quote:

"For many people in our state, the flag stands for traditions that are noble — traditions of history, of heritage and of ancestry… At the same time, for many others in South Carolina, the flag is a deeply offensive symbol of a brutally oppressive past. As a state, we can survive, as we have done, while still being home to both of those viewpoints. We do not need to declare a winner and loser."

And so, I said, it was time to remove the Confederate Flag from the statehouse grounds.

This was no easy task. It was a highly emotional issue in our state. And removal required a two-thirds vote in both our State House and Senate.

But several days later, large, diverse, and bipartisan majorities in our state legislature voted to bring down the flag.

We found consensus on a very tough issue. Republicans and Democrats worked together and made progress by talking to each other like human beings. We saw past our differences, and united to move forward, as one state and one people.

What was true then, with the flag, can be true now, with abortion.

This shouldn't be about one movement winning, and another one losing.

This shouldn't be about picking sides, scoring points, or stoking outrage.

It's about saving babies and supporting moms.

I am fighting for all of them, and I will work with anyone to do that.

I have faith we can make progress. I have faith we can save more lives, and give every baby, mother, and family the best shot at the best life.

Our national history should give us hope.

Time and again, the American people have confronted great wrongs, and worked hard to convince their fellow citizens to make them right.

Think back to the abolitionists. They spent the better part of a century striving to end our original sin of slavery.

Think back to the suffragettes. It took them even longer to secure the support of their fellow citizens for women's right to vote.

Think back to the leaders of the civil rights movement. Their tireless work showed America that segregation was wrong, and equality was right.

Think about the progress we're already making in the restoration of the right to life. Fifty years ago, a court forced unlimited abortion on an unwilling nation.

Millions of Americans responded – not with rage, but with resolve.

They reminded our fellow citizens about the humanity of the unborn child and the needs of pregnant mothers.

Now that power has been restored to the people. Let us treat it as the important and deeply personal issue it is. Let's discuss it in ways that allow Americans to show love for one another, not judgment or contempt. And let's find a consensus that allows us to save as many babies as we can while supporting women in difficult situations.

I am ready for the hard work that lies ahead. And I'm confident we can move together, toward our founding promise of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all.

Thank you. God bless you. And God bless America.

Nikki Haley, Remarks Delivering a Policy Speech on Abortion in Arlington, Virginia Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/360587

Filed Under

Simple Search of Our Archives

Report a typo.

During debate, Trump and Biden make clear where they stand on abortion

Women hold signs in green advocating for abortion rights

Copy Link URL Copied!

Abortion took center stage during Thursday’s debate between President Biden and former President Trump.

CNN anchor Dana Bash opened the conversation by asking Trump whether he’d block abortion medication.

“The Supreme Court just approved the abortion pill, and I agree with their decision to have done that, and I will not block it,” Trump responded, referring to the recent Supreme Court decision that dismissed a conservative Christian group’s claim that the abortion medication used by more than 5 million American women is unsafe and should be withdrawn from the market.

Trump then pivoted to something he touts in his usual campaign speech — that he put three justices on the Supreme Court, which ultimately overturned Roe vs. Wade.

FILE - People march through downtown Amarillo to protest a lawsuit to ban the abortion drug mifepristone, Feb. 11, 2023, in Amarillo, Texas. Two years after the U.S. Supreme Court ended a nationwide right to abortion, travel and pills have become big parts of the issue.(AP Photo/Justin Rex, File)

World & Nation

The Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade in 2022. Here’s the state of abortion rights in the U.S.

Two years after the Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade, the debate over abortion access is playing out in elections and the courts.

June 21, 2024

The Dobbs case in 2022 returned decision-making power on the issue of abortion to the states, where a patchwork of laws has played out in the last two years. Now, women have access to abortion care in places such as California but not in states such as Texas. At least 10 states are expected to have abortion-related measures on the ballot in November, which polls show motivate Democrats to go to the polls. Several states, including California , have added abortion access protections to their constitutions.

“We brought it back to the states and the country is now getting back together,” Trump said. Repeatedly, he said that “everyone” supported repealing Roe.

Biden pounced on the Roe ruling and Trump’s appointments to the Supreme Court.

“It’s been a terrible thing, what you’ve done,” Biden retorted. “The idea that states are able to do this is a little like saying we’re going to turn civil rights back to the states, but each state have a different role.”

Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert M. Brutinel, center, speaks during oral arguments, Tuesday, April 20, 2021, in Phoenix as Vice Chief Justice Ann A. Scott Timmer, left, and Justice Clint Bolick listen. The Arizona Supreme Court heard an expedited constitutional challenge to a new voter-approved tax on high-earning Arizonans designed to boost school funding on Tuesday. (AP Photo/Matt York)

The newest election battlefield for abortion: State supreme courts

Following the demise of Roe v. Wade, interest groups are pouring unprecedented amounts of money into races to elect or retain justices on state supreme courts.

May 29, 2024

Biden promised that if he won, he would restore the rights under Roe.

The two candidates sparred over how late in a pregnancy a person can get an abortion. Trump repeated false claims that abortions would be allowed “even after birth.” The law under Roe vs. Wade would allow for abortions in the third trimester under extremely rare circumstances, usually because of serious fetal issues or the risk to a mother’s health, according to Politifact.

“We are not for late-term abortion period, period, under Roe v. Wade,” Biden said.

Trump said he believes in having exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother. “Some people don’t, follow your heart,” he said of the exceptions.

Column: A tongue-tied octogenarian debates a pathological liar. Nobody won, but Biden clearly lost

June 28, 2024

Biden’s verbal stumbles, Trump’s ‘morals of an alley cat’: 6 debate takeaways

June 27, 2024

This combination of photos shows Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump, left, and President Joe Biden during a presidential debate hosted by CNN, Thursday, June 27, 2024, in Atlanta. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)

Biden stumbles amid fierce attacks from Trump

Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter

Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.

Faith E. Pinho is a reporter for the Los Angeles Times, covering national and political news, including the 2024 election.

More From the Los Angeles Times

FILE - Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg speaks to the media after a jury found former President Donald Trump guilty on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, May 30, 2024, in New York. Bragg won't oppose delaying former President Donald Trump's sentencing in his hush money case after the Supreme Court immunity ruling. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig, File)

Prosecutor won’t oppose Trump sentencing delay in hush money case after immunity ruling

FILE - Former Mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani speaks during a news conference outside the federal courthouse in Washington, Dec. 15, 2023. Giuliani, also a former Donald Trump attorney, was processed Monday, June 10, 2024, in the criminal case over the effort to overturn Trump’s Arizona election loss to Joe Biden, the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office said. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

Giuliani disbarred in N.Y. as court finds he repeatedly lied about Trump’s 2020 election loss

President Donald Trump speaks during a rally protesting the electoral college certification of Joe Biden as President, Wednesday, Jan. 6, 2021, in Washington. Trump enters the last days of his presidency facing a second impeachment and growing calls for his resignation after his supporters launched an assault on the nation’s Capitol in an effort to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. Yet Trump will try to go on offense in his last 10 days, with no plans of resigning. Instead, Trump is planning to lash out against the companies that have now denied him his Twitter and Facebook bullhorns. And aides hope he will spend his last days trying to trumpet his policy accomplishments, beginning with a trip to Alamo, Texas Tuesday, Jan. 12, 2021. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Supreme Court’s decision would free a reelected President Trump to ignore the law, experts warn

FILE - Kari Lake, Republican candidate for Arizona governor, speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Dallas, Aug. 5, 2022. The Board of Supervisors in rural Cochise County in southeastern Arizona on Monday, Oct. 24 were debating a hand count of all ballots in the midterm election. A federal judge in August dismissed a lawsuit by Lake and Mark Finchem, Republican nominee for secretary of state, to require the state's officials to count ballots by hand in November because of unfounded claims of voting machine problems. (AP Photo/LM Otero, File)

Column: Trump’s Big Lie isn’t just a national scourge. Local candidates are also fighting for democracy

July 2, 2024

Asia - Pacific
Middle East - Africa
Apologetics
Benedict XVI
Catholic Links
Church Fathers
Life & Family
Liturgical Calendar
Pope Francis
CNA Newsletter
Editors Service About Us Advertise Privacy

Wisconsin Supreme Court rules in favor of pro-life advocate citing ‘free speech rights’

By Gigi Duncan

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Jul 1, 2024 / 17:00 pm

The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled late last week that a court order prohibiting a pro-life advocate from approaching a Planned Parenthood employee violated his free speech rights under the First Amendment and must be overturned.

Brian Aish, a pro-life advocate who regularly and peacefully protested at a Planned Parenthood clinic in the city of Blair, began interacting with nurse Nancy Kindschy in 2019 and was eventually accused of harassment.

Holding signs that quoted the Bible and expressed his Christian faith, Aish told Kindschy in October of that same year that she “had time to repent.”

Aish told the Planned Parenthood employee that it wouldn’t “be long before bad things will happen to you and your family” and that she could “be killed by a drunk driver tonight.”

In February 2020, Aish told Kindschy and her co-workers: “I pray you guys make it home safely for another day or two until you turn to Christ and repent. You still have time.”

In court, Kindschy argued that Aish’s messages were “threatening,” thus leading to the Trempealeau County judge issuing a four-year injunction banning Aish from being anywhere near her. While a state appeals court upheld this ruling in 2022 following Aish’s appeal, the state’s Supreme Court ordered on Thursday to dismiss it completely.

The Supreme Court unanimously agreed with Aish’s assertions that his dialogue with Kindschy — which occurred on a public sidewalk — was free speech protected under the First Amendment.

Furthermore, the unanimous ruling cited the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court case Counterman v. Colorado, which questioned the nature of a “true threat” unprotected by the First Amendment following a Colorado man’s conviction for stalking.

The case held that the First Amendment requires the government to prove at a minimum that the defendant “consciously disregarded a substantial risk that his communications would be viewed as threatening violence.”

Justice Rebecca Bradley concurred in Thursday’s judgment, stating in a separate opinion that “Aish’s statements could not be of true threats of violence because he disclaimed any desire for violence to befall Kindschy.”

“Because a reasonable fact finder could not construe Aish’s statements as true threats, the First Amendment protects them,” the opinion continued. “An unconstitutional injunction impermissibly infringed Aish’s fundamental First Amendment right to speak freely on ‘a profound moral issue on which Americans hold sharply conflicting views.’”

The clinic where Kindschy worked has since closed, but the Thomas More Society, a Catholic public interest law firm based in Chicago, applauded the recent ruling in favor of protecting the speech of pro-life advocates.

“We are very pleased that the Wisconsin Supreme Court vindicated Brian Aish’s free speech rights and restored his ability to continue sharing his pro-life message,” stated Joan Mannix, executive vice president and managing counsel of the Thomas More Society.

The Thomas More Society originally appealed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court following the initial injunction. This firm often represents pro-life groups and advocates, including those who have recently been convicted for violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act under the Biden administration.

“[The Wisconsin Supreme Court decision] reaffirms that the First Amendment embodies a paramount American value of protecting free speech even if the viewpoint expressed may be unpopular or controversial,” Mannix said. “[This is] a value that transcends partisan divides.”

Catholic News ,
Free Speech ,
First Amendment ,
Wisconsin ,
Thomas More Society ,
prolife2024

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

Our mission is the truth. join us.

Your monthly donation will help our team continue reporting the truth, with fairness, integrity, and fidelity to Jesus Christ and his Church.

‘It’s filled me with so much hope’: National Eucharistic Pilgrimage passes through Wisconsin

The light of the overcast evening was fading as pilgrims gathered for a Holy Hour of Eucharistic adoration on Tuesday at St. Peter’s Catholic Church.

Wisconsin man sentenced to over 7 years in prison for firebombing pro-life organization

Hridindu Sankar Roychowdhury, 29, had pleaded guilty to one charge of attempting to cause damage by means of fire or an explosive.

Pope Francis appoints new bishop to lead Wisconsin diocese

Pope Francis on Tuesday appointed Detroit Auxiliary Bishop Gerard Battersby to lead the Diocese of La Crosse in western Wisconsin.

Some Nebraskans say misleading words led them to sign petitions on abortion they don’t support

The Associated Press

July 1, 2024, 8:22 PM

Share This:
share on facebook
share on threads
share on linkedin
share on email

OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — Tea Rohrberg was heading into her county’s treasurer’s office in Omaha, Nebraska, on Monday when she says she was approached by a man and asked if she wanted to sign a “pro-choice petition.” Because she believes access to abortion is a right all women should have, she readily signed.

But Rohrberg soon learned from a different volunteer that she had actually signed a petition being circulated by Protect Women and Children, which seeks to ask voters in November to codify Nebraska’s new 12-week abortion ban in the state constitution. She approached the man who she said had coerced her into signing the petition by calling it a “pro-choice” measure. She told him she wanted to cross her name off the petition. He told her he’d cross it off later, she said.

“I was like, ‘No, I just want my name off it.’ Then he said, ‘Well then just vote no later,'” she said.

What she did instead was head to the Omaha office of Protect Our Rights, which is seeking to enshrine abortion rights in the Nebraska Constitution, to file a notarized affidavit to have her name officially removed. She then signed the organization’s petition to protect abortion rights through fetal viability or at any time in pregnancy to protect the health of the woman.

Rohrberg is far from alone in being misled to sign a Nebraska abortion petition. The Nebraska Secretary of State’s office said that by late Friday, it had received 91 affidavits from voters seeking to have their names removed from an abortion petition.

The vast majority — 67 — came from those seeking to have their name removed from Protect Women and Children or other petitions seeking to ban abortions. Only seven had sought to remove their names from a petition to protect abortion rights.

Organizers with Protect Women and Children did not return emails seeking comment.

Both sides accuse the other of dirty tricks to gather the roughly 123,000 signatures needed before Wednesday’s deadline to turn them in.

“They are explicitly lying to voters,” Protect Our Rights campaign manager Allie Berry said of organizers seeking to solidify Nebraska’s 12-week abortion ban. “They’re using really deceptive tactics to get people to sign.”

Conversely, Nebraska Right to Life Executive Director Sandy Danek said the group has heard from anti-abortion allies that abortion rights petition circulators have tried duping people into signing.

Nebraska is among at least seven states where initiatives aimed at codifying abortion and reproductive rights are proposed for the November ballot, the latest sign of the deep divisions created by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision two years ago to end a constitutional right to abortion.

In the wake of that ruling, Republicans who dominate Nebraska’s state government sought to immediately issue abortion restrictions, including a total abortion ban that failed in 2022. Last year, another bill failed that would have outlawed abortions at around six weeks of pregnancy — before most women know they’re pregnant.

Last year, lawmakers settled for a 12-week ban with exceptions for rape, incest and to save the life of the mother.

Abortion rights advocates in the state have been emboldened by voter initiatives elsewhere that have either enshrined abortion rights or turned back attempts to restrict it.

Nearly 6 in 10 Nebraska voters in the 2022 midterm elections said abortion should be legal in all or most cases, and about 8 in 10 said the state should allow abortion if the mother’s health is seriously endangered by the pregnancy, according to AP VoteCast, an expansive survey of the electorate. Slightly less than half said Nebraska should allow a legal abortion if the woman does not want to be pregnant for any reason.

Anti-abortion advocates have offered at least three petition efforts this year, including an effort seeking to ban abortion at all stages of pregnancy by recognizing embryos as people. It’s unlikely to garner the number of signatures needed to make the November ballot.

The petition to codify a 12-week abortion ban into the state constitution is being bankrolled almost exclusively by Nebraska multimillionaires, including Republican U.S. Sen. Pete Ricketts — one of the wealthiest members of the Senate — who has donated $1 million of his own money of the $2 million raised.

The Nebraska Catholic Conference, the lobbying arm of the Roman Catholic Church in Nebraska, has for months blanketed the state with presentations to push support for the 12-week ban petition. Marion Miner with the conference said in a June 6 presentation that anti-abortion groups would prefer a total ban that makes no exceptions for rape and incest but acknowledged they’re unlikely to get public support.

“It’s been tried in other states in recent years, and it’s not been competitive even in, you know, very pro-life states,” he said.

Related News

Prosecutor won’t oppose Trump sentencing delay in hush money case after high court immunity ruling

Giuliani is disbarred in New York as court finds he repeatedly lied about Trump’s 2020 election loss

Judge issues ruling that protects a migrant shelter that Texas sought to close

Recommended.

2 dead, child in critical condition after early-morning fire in Largo

'Unusually bad case': Va. man gets 6 life sentences for drugging, raping underage girls

Va. school board member sentenced for role in Jan. 6 Capitol riot

Related categories:.

Supported by

Social Conservatives Push Trump on the G.O.P.’s Anti-Abortion Platform

Leaders of the anti-abortion movement sent a letter to Donald J. Trump amid worries he may try to weaken the anti-abortion language in the party platform.

Share full article

Donald Trump stands on a stage next to Ralph Reed, a row of American flags in the background.

By Shane Goldmacher and Jonathan Swan

A group of some of the most powerful social conservatives in the country, fearful that Donald J. Trump may push to water down the Republican Party’s official position on abortion, sent a pointed letter to the former president this month imploring him to keep strong anti-abortion language in the party platform.

The letter, which has not previously been reported but was reviewed by The New York Times, is the latest sign of the fierce behind-the-scenes lobbying underway over the language that will officially outline the party’s principles. The Republican platform has not been updated in eight years and is especially outdated on the topic of abortion after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.

The letter urges Mr. Trump to “make clear that you do not intend to weaken the pro-life plank.” Specifically, it asks him to commit to keeping language in the platform that the party supports a “human life amendment to the Constitution” and legislation to “make clear that the 14th Amendment’s protections apply to children before birth.”

It was co-signed by 10 anti-abortion leaders, including Marjorie Dannenfelser of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, Ralph Reed of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council and Penny Nance of Concerned Women for America. Ms. Dannenfelser delivered the letter via email to Mr. Trump’s top adviser, Susie Wiles, on June 10, as the party prepares to hold its national convention in Milwaukee starting July 15.

While the conservative leaders praise Mr. Trump as “the most pro-life president in American history,” the subtext of their letter is the growing concern in social conservative circles that Mr. Trump may try to weaken the anti-abortion language in the party platform to make himself appear more moderate on the issue. Democrats are expected to spend hundreds of millions of dollars over the next four months reminding voters of Mr. Trump’s anti-abortion record as president.

Mr. Perkins, who is on the Republican National Committee’s platform committee, said that it was crucial for the party not to backtrack in its platform and that the Trump team had not sufficiently explained its plans to leaders of the anti-abortion movement.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

Want all of The Times? Subscribe .

IMAGES

⇉Abortion Persuasive Speech Essay Example
≫ Pro Choice: Abortion is Moral Free Essay Sample on Samploon.com
Anti-abortions speech
⇉Persuasive about abortions Essay Example
Opinion
16 Free Pro-Abortion Posters to Print & Display

VIDEO

reply to Persuasive Speech 20240509 1122421
Reply to Persuasive Speech 4. 20240509 1200181
Persuasive Speech
Persuasive Speech Immigration Crisis
Persuasive speech opioid crisis in Florida
Persuasive Speech

COMMENTS

Persuasive Essay About Abortion: Examples, Topics, and Facts
Here are some facts about abortion that will help you formulate better arguments. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 1 in 4 pregnancies end in abortion. The majority of abortions are performed in the first trimester. Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures, with less than a 0.5% risk of major complications.
Pro-Choice Does Not Mean Pro-Abortion: An Argument for Abortion Rights
Pro-Choice Does Not Mean Pro-Abortion: An Argument for Abortion Rights Featuring the Rev. Carlton Veazey. Since the Supreme Court's historic 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, the issue of a woman's right to an abortion has fostered one of the most contentious moral and political debates in America. Opponents of abortion rights argue that life ...
Persuasive Pro Choice Abortion Stance
This essay adopts a pro-choice perspective, arguing that women should have the right to make informed decisions about their reproductive health, including access to safe and legal abortion services. By examining the importance of bodily autonomy, the consequences of restrictive abortion laws, and the role of personal beliefs in shaping abortion ...
Pro-life persuasion: How to discuss abortion with logic and grace
Remember these three steps of the pro-life argument: The unborn (the human embryo or fetus) is a human being—a living human organism at the earliest developmental stages. This is a fact of science. All human beings—regardless of age, size, ability, and dependency—have human rights. This is a principle of justice.
The Rhetoric That Shaped The Abortion Debate : NPR
By Linda Greenhouse and Reva B. Siegel. Hardcover, 352 pages. Kaplan Publishing. List Price: $26. Read an Excerpt. Before the Supreme Court struck down many state laws restricting abortion in the ...
Abortion Is About Freedom, Not Just Privacy
Failing to persuade women through conventional forms of protest, the anti-abortion right adopted increasingly violent tactics. In 1989, Terry said, "I believe in the use of force."
Why Biden gave a speech about abortion rights : NPR
Twice in his speech, once near the beginning and again at the end, he invoked what he called, quote, "the anger, the worry, the disbelief" that Democrats felt when the Supreme Court ended the ...
The Only Reasonable Way to Debate Abortion
There's a Better Way to Debate Abortion. Caution and epistemic humility can guide our approach. If Justice Samuel Alito's draft majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health ...
Aspen Baker: A better way to talk about abortion
Abortion is extremely common. In America, for example, one in three women will have an abortion in their lifetime, yet the strong emotions sparked by the topic -- and the highly politicized rhetoric around it -- leave little room for thoughtful, open debate. In this personal, thoughtful talk, Aspen Baker makes the case for being neither "pro-life" nor "pro-choice" but rather "pro-voice ...
Key facts about abortion views in the U.S.
Women (66%) are more likely than men (57%) to say abortion should be legal in most or all cases, according to the survey conducted after the court's ruling. More than half of U.S. adults - including 60% of women and 51% of men - said in March that women should have a greater say than men in setting abortion policy.
Persuasive Speeches on Abortion
Preparing an Abortion Persuasive Speech: Essential Steps. The process of writing any persuasive speech includes several steps. And all of them are equally important if you want to craft the best speech possible. Speaking of abortion persuasive essay writing, here are the steps you need to follow to prepare an exceptional speech: Research the topic.
To Be Pro-Choice, You Must Have the Privilege of Having Choices
People of color don't have the privilege of focusing on only one issue — everything is connected. Reproductive justice has always been more than just being "pro-choice.". To be pro-choice ...
BBC
Here are some of the women's rights arguments in favour of abortion: women have a moral right to decide what to do with their bodies. the right to abortion is vital for gender equality. the right ...
PDF SO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT ABORTION?
Step 1 - Prepare your "why". Story development and how to create your story for lasting impact. Step 2 - Know the Facts. Abortion facts and talking points to use in your conversations. Step 3 - Think About Who You Want to Speak With, When And How To Address Them. Crafting your conversations for success.
A High School Teen's Powerful Graduation Speech About Abortion Rights
June 2, 2021. YouTube. Paxton Smith, the 2021 valedictorian of Lake Highlands High School in Dallas, gave an impassioned graduation speech about abortion rights that's going viral. For those ...
Why Freedom of Speech Is the Next Abortion Fight
The pro-life movement has hoped that states' new powers to shut down abortion providers will radically reduce the number of abortions around the country. The pro-choice movement has feared that ...
Persuasive Essay On Pro Choice
Persuasive Essay On Pro Choice. 2254 Words10 Pages. Pro-Choice "77% of Anti-Abortion Leaders are men, 100% of them will never be pregnant" (Barbara Kruger). Whether to continue or end a pregnancy, has been a long debated topic, extending long after the Roe v. Wade case that went all the way to the Supreme court (ProCon).
I Am Pro-Life. Don't Call Me Anti-Abortion.
The struggle in the abortion debate is, in many ways, a struggle over language. For example, I am pro-life. I strongly support rights and protections for mothers and children, including prenatal ...
Abortion is Our Right, and We Won't Be Silenced
An Idaho College Censored Their Reproductive Health Care Art, But These Artists Won't be Silenced. Three artists whose work was removed from an exhibit at Lewis-Clark State College speak out about attempts to silence stories about abortion. We know that freedom of speech, artistic expression, and reproductive freedom go hand in hand. We must ...
Surprise, Mom: I'm Against Abortion
Surprise, Mom: I'm Against Abortion. By Elizabeth Hayt. March 30, 2003. FOR her high school class in persuasive speech, Afton Dahl, 16, chose to present an argument that abortion should be illegal ...
Hardest Speech: Lawmakers Now Speaking Out About Own Abortions
Only one member of Congress has ever talked about her own abortion on the House floor. In 2011, U.S. Rep. Jackie Speier of California, 65, talked about how her unborn baby had slipped out of her ...
Remarks Delivering a Policy Speech on Abortion in Arlington, Virginia
Abortion is a deeply personal topic for both women and men. I understand why. Someone's body and someone else's life are not things to be taken lightly, and they should not be politicized. The issue should be addressed with sensitivity and respect, not judgment and hate. Most people have a story that has brought them to their views about abortion.
Pro-Choice Abortion Persuasive Speech Presentation
Pro-Choice Abortion Sree Karnati English Literature II Mrs. Tutt January 29, 2019 Savita Halappanavar Real Life Cases Miscarriage and Plea for Abortion 17 weeks into the pregnancy, the couple was told that Savita was having a miscarriage. The couple pleaded for an abortion because
At debate, Trump and Biden make clear their abortion stances
The Dobbs case in 2022 returned decision-making power on the issue of abortion to the states, where a patchwork of laws has played out in the last two years. Now, women have access to abortion ...
Debate response: RFK Jr. supports sealing border, says he's pro ...
Wade, Kennedy said he believed abortion should be the choice of the woman. He believed state intervention should not happen until a fetus reaches viability and did not support late-term abortions.
NC GOP governor candidate Mark Robinson: Quotes about abortion
Robinson also talked about standing up to the "scourge of abortion," and said that if a law was passed in North Carolina, people could still go to other states for an abortion. The speech was ...
Wisconsin Supreme Court rules in favor of pro-life advocate
The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled late last week that a court order prohibiting a pro-life advocate from approaching a Planned Parenthood employee violated his free speech rights under the First ...
Some Nebraskans say misleading words led them to sign petitions on
Nearly 6 in 10 Nebraska voters in the 2022 midterm elections said abortion should be legal in all or most cases, and about 8 in 10 said the state should allow abortion if the mother's health is ...
Conservatives Worry Trump Will Weaken G.O.P.'s Anti-Abortion Platform
It was co-signed by 10 anti-abortion leaders, including Marjorie Dannenfelser of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, Ralph Reed of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, Tony Perkins of the Family ...
Democrats' War on Pregnancy Centers Shows They're Pro-Abortion, Not Pro
The move by pro-abortion states to eliminate alternatives and "choice" by targeting pro-life pregnancy resource centers is not actually a matter of life, to use Representative Clark's words. It's about cementing a state-sanctioned culture of death. LifeNews Note: John Stonestreet writes for BreakPoint.org.