Four decades after Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion, many opponents of the decision are in a celebratory mood while those backing abortion rights are glum, feeling that momentum is turning decisively against them.
Instead, what's really going on is a case study in the psychology of movement politics, where activists have to rally supporters with cries of alarm without making them despair that all is lost. At the same time, they must offer evidence that their efforts are paying off without leaving them complacent.
It's a difficult balancing act, and lately the abortion rights camp has been the one to sound the warnings.
"As memories of women dying from illegal pre-Roe abortions become more distant, the pro-choice cause is in crisis," Kate Pickert wrote in a bleak—for Roe supporters—and eye-catching Time magazine cover essay this month.
Pickert pointed to the growing number of state-level actions to restrict access to abortion services—the Guttmacher Institute's annual review found that in 2012 there were 43 such provisions in 19 state laws—and the decrease in abortion providers nationwide, from 2,908 in 1982 to 1,793 in 2008.
Civil disobedience, conscientious objection, and what to make of believers defying the government.
Matrimony rates are in decline, even among conservative Christians. Here’s what that means for the future.
The use of fetal cell lines from the 1960s is another sticking point in the vaccine debate.
Survey of a thousand local believers finds majority desire a one-state solution, while few complain about religious freedom.العربية
