Let's be clear about what was illegal, because the radical definition, 'life begins at fertilization', is a recent innovation[1]:
> Abortion was not always a crime. During the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, abortion of early pregnancy was legal under common law.[22] Abortions were illegal only after "quickening," the point at which a pregnant woman could feel the movements of the fetus (approximately the fourth month of pregnancy). The common law's attitude toward pregnancy and abortion was based on an understanding of pregnancy and human development as a process rather than an absolute moment. Indeed, the term abortion referred only to the miscarriages of later pregnancies, after quickening.
[1] https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft967n...
Also, “life begins at conception,” or at another very early stage, isn’t a Christian innovation. That’s the belief in Shia Islam. Certain Sunni schools also prohibit abortion at any stage. In Thailand, a Buddhist country, abortion was illegal at all stages of pregnancy until 2021.
Same thing in Hinduism: https://indiacurrents.com/a-hindu-view-on-abortion/
Prohibitions against abortion, even at early stages, are common across the world’s belief systems. Perhaps the only thing you could call uncommon is the view that abortion is impermissible even to save the life of the mother. But that’s an uncommon view even within evangelical Christianity.
The answer of course is that abortion rights would win by a healthy margin[1] if the public had any say in the matter.
> Pro-choice sentiment is now the highest Gallup has measured since 1995 when it was 56% -- the only other time it has been at the current level or higher -- while the 39% identifying as "pro-life" is the lowest since 1996.
[1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/393104/pro-choice-identificatio...
This is a lie ("In Shia Islam, abortion is "forbidden after implantation of the fertilised ovum.", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_abortion). I guess it never occurred to you why even the Sharia countries are not as extreme on abortion as Christian ones.
>Certain Sunni schools also prohibit abortion at any stage.
Obvious lie, ibid.
>Buddhist
Nope, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_abortion
>Same thing in Hinduism
Okay, so this one is not entirely wrong, just mostly wrong (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_and_abortion).
Once again: "life from conception" is a fringe view specific to Catholicism and borrowed by other extremist branches.
See page numbers 18 here
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf
What you’re describing is instead an ideological schism within Protestant Christianity. Since Luther, Protestant Christianity had a strong natalist orientation. That’s why abortion was illegal in every US state by 1910. But during the 20th century, mainline protestantism adopted an anti-natalist view out of concerns about overpopulation and the welfare of the poor. That’s the genesis of the modern US abortion debate.
It’s not accurate to say that these patterns reflect views on abortion being “fluid.” Protestantism isn’t centralized—especially denominations like Baptists. Until the mid-20th century, pretty much all the denominations agreed abortion was wrong. Once the anti-natal movement got going, those denominations fractured and people sorted into different ones. For example, the Evangelical Presbyterian church split from what’s now the PCUSA in 1981. Both are “evangelical.” But we apply the “evangelical” label to one and not the other, based on their views on abortion and other issues.