Abortion is a highly polarizing issue in America, and most people have strong opinions about it. In Abortion & the Politics of Motherhood, Kristin Luker analyzes it as a complex issue tied to religious beliefs, attitudes toward sexuality, historical context, and gender roles. Some people might think that if everyone agreed on when life begins, whether conception, birth, or something in between, the debate would be over, but Luker argues that it wouldn't end so simply. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay To take a deeper look at the issue, Luker analyzes the deeper factors at play. “Why is the debate so harsh, so emotional? Part of the answer is simple: the two sides share almost no common premise and very little common language.” (Lucer 2) “When pro-life and pro-choice activists think about abortion, abortion itself is simply 'the tip of the iceberg.' Different beliefs about gender roles, the meaning of parenthood, and human nature come into play when it comes to abortion.” (Lucer 158) One of the main differences between the movements at the level of activism is that the pro-life movement is primarily based on religion, and the pro-choice movement has little to do with religion. “Almost 80% of the women active in the pro-life movement at the time were Catholic.” (Lucer 196) “In stark contrast, 63% of pro-choice women say they have no religion.” (Lucer 196) These religious differences result in drastically different worldviews, the main reason why “personhood” is not really the end-all be-all of the abortion debate. “In the course of our interviews for this book, we spoke with eleven activists across the state who began their public opposition to abortion before the passage of the Beilenson bill of 1967. Of these eleven, nine were Catholic professionals and one was an active housewife with her husband, himself a Catholic professional.” (Luke 127-128) This also shows that there are most likely more men involved at the level of pro-life activists. Pro-life activists are highly religious and base their entire lives around their religious beliefs. Therefore, they use their religious beliefs for their activism. “Because they believe these rules originate in a Divine Plan, they see them as transcendent principles, eternally valid regardless of time, cultural context, and individual belief.” (Lucer 174) Another important factor in the debate is gender roles. Pro-life activists have very outdated gender roles. Most of them believe that women should be mothers and wives before being anything else, while pro-life activists believe that motherhood and marriage are only options for women, and are not all there is in life. “Pro-life activists agree that men and women, as a result of these inherent differences, have different roles to play: men are better suited to the world of public work, and women are better suited to raising children, managing home and to love and care for their husbands.” (Luke 160) In contrast, “Pro-choice people agree that women (and men) find children and families a satisfying part of life, but they also think it is reckless for a woman to believe that this is the only life role they will ever have.” (Lucer 176) Pro-choice activists believe that women should be able to support themselves without a husband, but they should be able to take onwhatever role in life they find most attractive, whether they are mothers and wives, workers or both. There are also different views on sexuality that influence the topic of abortion. Pro-choice activists see sex not only as a necessity for the population, but as a natural desire for pleasure, and therefore advocate contraception to prevent unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases/STIs. “More precisely, they argue that belief in the fundamental procreative nature of sex leads to an oppressive degree of social regulation of sexual behavior, especially the behavior of women, who must be protected (from their point of view, repressed) because free expression of sexual desires will get them “in trouble” and drive the species towards overpopulation.” (Lucer 177) For pro-choice activists, restricting abortion is oppressive because it limits their life choices and therefore leads to other problems such as poverty and fewer educational and career opportunities. There is also a certain factor of alienation for unmarried and pregnant women, as presented by this interview: “The penalty was effectively that of excommunication. Not literally, because she was still somewhat in touch, but she was struck from the membership roll and became a listener, as they called it, a listener. He could attend church, but he would not be a member.” (Lucer 177) Pro-choice activists believe that in a situation like this, where a woman might face social backlash or isolation, abortion is a valid option. Meanwhile, pro-life attitudes on sexuality differ. For the most part, sex is for procreative purposes for a married man and his wife, and is unacceptable in any other case. They consider sex sacred because it can bring children into the world. “Contraception, premarital sex and infidelity are wrong not only because of their social consequences, but also because they rob the sexual experience of its meaning.” (Luke 164) They believe that whenever a married couple has sex, they should be open to the possibility of having children and that things that prevent the birth of a potential child are wrong. “Virtually all of them were firmly convinced that the pill and the IUD are abortifacients (they could cause the death of a very young embryo) and that passing a human life against abortion would also ban the pill and the IUD. Furthermore, most of them refused to use contraceptives for moral reasons." (Lucer 165) Another factor that prevents pro-choice and pro-life activists from finding common ground is the difference in their social status and interests. Aside from religious differences, there are differences in professional position and financial background. “Among pro-choice women, nearly four in ten had pursued graduate work beyond their bachelor’s degree.” (Lucer 195) “Pro-life women, in comparison, had much less education: 10% of them had only a high school education or less, and 30% had never finished college (as opposed to only l 8% of pro-choice women). women. Pro-life women are also the least likely to find a job and, when they do, earn only small amounts of income, but pro-choice women work at much higher rates and earn more. “Among pro-life married women, for example, only 14% report earning an income.” (Lucer 195) “An astonishing 94 percent of all pro-choice women are working, and over half of them have incomes in the top ten percent of working women in this country. .” (Lucer 195) It appears that these differences in education and employment can be traced back to attitudes about women's place: pro-life women believe that their place is to take.