Where do you stand on abortion? Politicians are routinely "asked" this question. "Confronted" might be a better description because for many voters the issue of abortion is a litmus test for separating candidates. Two extreme views on the issue, represented by the Christian Coalition on the right and the National Organization of Women on the left, have dominated the national conversation on abortion. But where does that leave moderates? Where does it leave those struggling to find a satisfactory solution to this mess?

To solve that red-hot controversy, a whole cluster of weighty issues are constantly juggled and judged. The definition of life, separation of church and state, private versus public rights, and moral and legal battles are all considered. The complexity and multiplicity of issues under discussion only adds to the difficulty of reaching consensus anything akin to a "solution."

National surveys conducted in 1989-1990 confirm the perception that the public has not reached a definitive conclusion about abortion. When asked to consider all the arguments pro and con, 51 percent identified themselves as opposed to abortion, 41 percent in favor, and 8 percent claimed to be neutral or unsure. An even greater proportion held abortion to be morally wrong--61 percent, compared to 22 percent who judged it morally permissible.

Yet when asked how they felt about someone they knew having an abortion, a surprising 39 percent of respondents approved, with 32 percent of respondents and 25 percent asserting that the their answers would depend on the specific circumstances.

So what do these numbers mean?

Perhaps that can be answered by citing one more telling statistic.

A large majority (69 percent) of those polled agreed with this statement: "Even in cases where might think abortion is the wrong thing to do, I don't think the government has any business preventing a woman from having an abortion."

These numbers, in effect, send a message to the government.

Although many Americans may agree with pro-lifers in believing abortion to be morally wrong, few would approve of government interference.

Of course, numbers are, admittedly, only numbers. Flashing a set of fancy data has never accomplished anything. But percentages can give us a window into the beliefs of the electorate. According to this poll, it appears that Americans are reluctant to impose their morals on the great public. Despite their individual misgivings about abortion, they would rather allow each woman to make that choice on her own. Gone are the days of Prohibition, when a vocal group of activists were able to impose their morality upon the rest of the nation.

But during that time of Prohibition, as drug czar Barry McCaffrey has noted, the negative results of alcohol dramatically declined as fewer people were able to abuse it. A similar argument can be made for overturning Roe v. Wade. If the law were to prevent abortion and stigmatize the procedure so that it comes to be seen as immoral, then perhaps fewer women would choose that option.

Such an argument releases the Pandora's box known as the abortion debate.

Public health officials rush in and cite estimates that thousands of women would be forced to seek refuge in basements and back-alleys. People hoisting the banner of the sanctity of life, defined as the moment of conception, cry "Murder!" and even "Baby-killer!"

A litany of arguments and defenses enter the scene. Too often, though, the marginal players of the debate dominate the national discussion of abortion. The murderers of doctors who perform abortions hardly advance their cause by committing sins in the name of sainthood; their sick attempt to thwart abortion only serves to harden the resolve of pro-choice activists and blacken the image of pro-life workers. To a lesser degree, the esteem of ultra-feminist groups is lowered when abortion is touted as a privilege rather than a last and most desperate resort.

I suspect that America is full of thoughtful and spiritual citizens who are earnestly trying to make heads and tails of the abortion debate. I, for one, know that conflicting interests and beliefs tug at my conscience. It is the ultimate soul-searching question because it strikes at the heart of my religious beliefs and at the core of my conception of government.

In high school, I proudly accompanied my mother on Hike for Life fund-raising campaigns for Chicago area Crisis Pregnancy Centers. Those counseling Centers provided information for pregnant women that highlighted alternatives to abortion, namely keeping the child or placing the baby up for adoption. I fervently believe these options are to be preferred, in all cases, and I relish the liberty I have to reach such a conclusion. In America, I am free to choose any definition of life that I please, based on any religion I choose to follow. I am free to enter into a loving, personal relationship with God and this encompasses the freedom not to obey the dictates of anyone's religion but my own.

So where do I stand on abortion?

I would like very much to stand tall and firm on a position, but I am afraid that all I can do for now is sit down and listen to rational discourse. And kneel before God in prayer.

Joshua L. Kwan, a junior in Pforzheimer House, is a Crimson editor.