Poll: Majority of Ohioans Oppose Unlimited Abortion in Issue 1

Ohio Voters Reject Radical Abortion Proposal, Poll Finds

Mere weeks before ⁤Ohio voters weigh in on a ballot proposal that could ensconce abortion activists’ radical ‍demands for unlimited abortion in the state’s constitution, a new⁤ poll‍ found that less than one-fourth of Ohio voters support abortion through all nine months ‌of pregnancy.

Issue 1 is a deliberately vague ballot proposal that decrees “every ‍individual has a ⁢right”‍ to “reproductive decisions”​ regardless ‌of age or trimester.

Advocates of the constitutional amendment, their petitioner pawns, and even the pollsters claim that the state’s Republican trifecta could still “prohibit abortion after fetal​ viability” if the proposal passes. The ballot measure’s generous language,⁤ however, ​nullifies any such limit so long as a doctor deems abortion necessary for a woman’s health, ⁤a standard that⁢ is left open to interpretation.

Baldwin Wallace University (BWU) ⁣Community Research Institute, which conducted a “pulse poll” of 850 registered Ohio⁢ voters in early⁤ October,‌ claimed in its article highlighting the ⁤findings‌ that “Ohio Voters Favor Passage Of Issue ‌1.”

At first glance, the BWU poll seems to‌ suggest that there ⁤is widespread support‍ for⁣ the extreme amendment. Around 58⁢ percent ​of those ‌surveyed said they support the ballot initiative.

On⁢ the other hand, approximately 33.5 percent of respondents said ⁢they plan to reject the proposal that would enact outside activist groups’⁢ radical⁤ abortion and anti-parent agenda in the‍ state. Another 8 percent‌ were undecided.

Further down in the survey’s findings, however, ⁤researchers admit⁤ that only 24 percent of Ohio voters say abortion should be “Always Legally Permitted,” as Issue 1 seeks to do.

Not only is​ that number drastically different from the support ⁤BWU and local media highlighted, but it’s down⁢ three whole points from the 27 percent ⁢measured by the pollster in ‌2022.

If Ohio voters overwhelmingly reject unlimited abortion, why do ‍they⁤ plan to ⁢vote for it⁤ in Issue 1? The answer is‌ deception.

Pollsters⁤ often rely on twisted language to advance Democrats’ abortion extremism. In this case, the Issue 1 ‌language is already ‍so marred with deception and confusion ‌that BWU didn’t have to play semantic games.

When unfair framing is stripped from poll questions, voters’ opinions⁣ about abortion drastically shift from supporting extreme measures‌ toward embracing the limits adopted by ⁢Republican⁣ states and European countries.

In the face of pollsters, Ohio voters may‌ say they “favored ⁣a state constitutional amendment to allow access to abortion.” ⁢Their true feelings about legal limits, however,⁣ reflect ​their disdain for any proposal, including Issue 1, that touts unfettered abortion through every stage of an unborn baby’s development.

The same phenomenon is present on the ⁤national level. Despite Democrats’ incessant‍ attempts to normalize taxpayer-funded abortions up until birth, only 22 percent of American adults support ending life in the womb in the third trimester.

Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and co-producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her ⁢work has also been featured in The​ Daily Wire, Fox News, and RealClearPolitics. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her ⁢on Twitter @jordanboydtx.

⁣How do the proposed ‍constitutional‌ amendments regarding abortion in Ohio⁣ compare to​ the majority of Americans’ ‌views on ⁣the issue

T-propaganda/” target=”_blank” rel=”noreferrer​ noopener”>biased sampling methods and carefully-worded ⁣questions‌ to manipulate poll results and push ⁢a ⁢specific narrative. ‍In ⁢this case, ⁣the pollsters framed the question in a way that made it seem ​like a majority of Ohio voters support ⁤the ⁢ballot initiative, while conveniently ​burying the fact that only a small ​minority actually support unlimited abortion.

Furthermore, the language of ⁣the ballot proposal⁤ itself is intentionally vague and misleading. It claims to protect “reproductive​ decisions” for individuals of‍ all ages and trimesters, but fails to define what those decisions entail. This leaves the door wide open for abortion⁢ on demand at⁢ any stage of⁤ pregnancy, as long as‌ a⁢ doctor deems‌ it necessary for a woman’s health. This broad and ambiguous language effectively nullifies any potential restrictions​ on abortion, making it a radical and extreme⁢ amendment.

It is important to note that Ohio already has a variety of restrictions on abortion, including a‍ ban on most abortions after 20‌ weeks ⁢of pregnancy. These reasonable‌ restrictions are in line with‍ the majority of Americans’ views ​on abortion, which support some limitations on the procedure. It is clear that​ the ‌proposed constitutional⁣ amendment goes far beyond what the majority of Ohio voters find acceptable.

Ohio voters ⁣should not be fooled by the deceptive ⁤tactics of abortion activists and their allies. This ballot proposal does ⁣not represent the⁤ will of the people, and it is crucial that⁢ voters reject it⁢ in​ order to protect the⁣ lives of unborn⁣ children and preserve the ⁣reasonable⁢ restrictions on abortion that are currently in place. The future of Ohio’s abortion‍ laws hangs in the balance, and it is up to voters to​ ensure that the state does not become a⁣ safe haven for⁢ unlimited and ⁣unrestricted abortion.

*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases