The tide appears to be turning when it comes to the abortion debate. For the first time in fifteen years more young adults identify themselves as strongly pro-life rather than pro-choice.

The findings were released in a June 2007 report by Overbrook Research, a public consulting firm in Illinois. Over 30,000 interviews were conducted between 1992 and 2006 concerning abortion. The authors of the study, Christopher Blunt and Fred Steeper, point out that the conditions surrounding the abortion issue have changed.

Today’s young adults have grown up in a climate of high technology and medical advances. Public attention has been drawn to the development of the infant in the womb with high-quality ultrasound images. The grisly details of partial-birth abortion have shown abortion and abortion advocates in a new light. The general public no longer view pro-life advocates as fanatics but questions those who would so vigorously support the gruesome procedure of partial-birth abortion.

In today’s climate, 37% of young women between the ages of 18-29, are strongly pro-life while only 25% are strongly pro-choice. Young men, ages 18-29, are also strongly pro-life, 34%, with only 20% being strongly pro-choice.

This is a significant change from 1992 where the focus was on access to abortions. In 1994 President Clinton signed into law the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act which prevented anyone from “barring access to facilities that provide abortion services.”

During this time 42% of young women between the ages of 18-29, were strongly pro-choice while only 24% were strongly pro-life. Young men, ages 18-29, were also strongly pro-choice, 36%, with only 22% being strongly pro-life.

The abortion position was also clearly defined along party lines, 58% of Democrats were strongly pro-choice while only 33% of Republicans were strongly pro-choice. Religion also played a role in individual abortion views: 35% of Protestants were strongly pro-choice, 24% of Catholics were strongly pro-choice, and those of no religious background or other denominations were 53% pro-choice.

The abortion climate began to change less than two years after the FACE Act. The focus was now on the effort to ban partial-birth abortion. The gruesome procedure was staunchly defended by the abortion industry and their advocates. Congress sent a bill banning the abortion method to President Clinton in 1996 which the president promptly vetoed. Congress was unsuccessful in overriding the veto. In 1997, Congress once again drafted a bill to ban partial-birth abortion, this time with public support from the American Medical Association. Once again, President Clinton vetoed the bill and an override attempt fell just three votes short in the Senate.

In 1999, Missouri took up the battle to ban partial-birth abortion. The Missouri legislature passed a bill which Governor Mel Carnahan vetoed. Missourian citizens flooded their lawmakers with letters and phone calls, and more than 10,000 citizens showed up at the State Capitol in a rally urging legislators to override the governor’s veto. Lawmakers got the message, and for only the seventh time in Missouri’s history, a governor’s veto was overturned. Partial-birth abortion was banned in Missouri. However the law was immediately challenged in the courts by abortion advocates.

In 2003, President Bush signed a federal ban of partial-birth abortion into law which was again challenged in the courts. In April 2007 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ban on partial-birth abortion.

The Overbrook Research report points out, “No longer must pro-life leaders explain the presence of clinic bombers and other extremists within their movement; instead, it is the pro-choice movement which must explain its support for partial-birth abortion and opposition to popular policies such as parental consent. Given how the public’s self-identification on abortion has changed, the pro-life label is no longer a disadvantage for candidates seeking public office. In fact, it now carries a net positive valence in Missouri…we can say with confidence that there has been a dramatic change in the climate surrounding the abortion issues – and that pro-life candidates should feel more confident in identifying themselves as such.”