We’ve reached a sorry state in America when everyone from politicians to news outlets and low-information voters glom onto “poll results” as the final arbiter — “proof source,” as it were — on which to rest their cases; given that the poll results on which they glom support the views they already had.

Utter nonsense.

Perhaps the late comedian George Carlin said it best: “Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.” Polls on overturning Roe v. Wade provide a perfect example — in multiple ways.

As reported by the Wall Street Journal on Thursday, their latest poll shows “more than two-thirds of Americans want to uphold Roe v. Wade, and most favor women having access to legal abortion for any reason.” That said, here’s the salient question: What percentage of those “two-thirds” of Americans who oppose overturning Roe actually understand what they oppose?

Anecdotally, I can tell you, as a political pundit, most people I talk to — both women and men — who support Roe wrongly believe overturning it would outlaw abortion from sea to shining sea. This could not be further from the truth.

As reported in mid-May by America Magazine, in an article titled “Why Americans Don’t Understand Polling on Roe vs. Wade,” according to a Monmouth University poll released on May 11, only 44 percent of those polled said Congress should “pass a law allowing abortions nationwide” (likely unconstitutional), if Roe is overturned. Most wanted Congress to either leave abortion law to the states (43 percent) or ban abortion nationwide (9 percent); neither of which would be possible if Roe is upheld.

Confused? Me, too, to an extent — just as I am with the notion that, according to the WSJ poll, most Americans believe on-demand abortion should be legal for any reason. But there is one thing I’m not confused about at all. On the contrary, I’m crystal clear on it: at the end of the proverbial day, there are two paramount people in this whole mess: a pregnant woman and the unborn child she carries. Should they not have equal representation in the abortion debate?

While pregnant women come down on both sides of the abortion argument, what about unborn children who, as 49 Democrat senators voted in May, could be aborted legally right up until birth, were it not for the Republicans? On-demand, for any reason. How would the unborn vote? How would they vote for their own lives?

And if Roe is overturned, as expected? Via the WSJ:

The high court has previously established the right to an abortion until a fetus is able to sustain meaningful life outside of the womb, which generally occurs at weeks 22 to 24 of pregnancy. Some states plan to preserve abortion access if Roe is overturned.

Others have passed laws seeking to limit the procedure that are currently blocked by state and federal courts and could go into effect if Roe were overturned. Oklahoma and Texas have in the past year implemented bans on performing abortions after six weeks.

The bottom line:

Clearly, regardless of the hyperbolic scare tactics of the pro-abortion crowd, overturning Roe would not outlaw abortion throughout the country, nor would it “threaten our democracy.” Ignore the idiocy; focus on the facts.

Second, the notion pushed by the left that men have no right to a say in the abortion issue is nonsensical, as well. The last time I checked — although I’m not a biologist — it took a male and a female to produce a child.

Given that unborn children cannot be polled and asked if they want to be “allowed” to live, or sentenced to death, they need as much support from as many corners as possible. We can do this. “Women’s health care” aside, of course.

Related on RedState:

Left-Wing Magazine Ridiculously Equates Outlawing Abortion With Slavery

Biden Defends Roe ‘Based on the 14th Amendment,’ yet Asserts 2nd Amendment ‘Was Never Absolute’

GOP Lawmaker Stuns Dem Hearing Witness in Revealing Exchange on ‘Abortion Until Birth’ Argument