Obama’s life contradictions from Compassion Forum
In my previous post I discussed Hillary Clinton’s contradictory statements on the life issue at last night’s Compassion Forum at Messiah College in PA, emceed by CNN’s Campbell Brown Newsweek’s religious writer, Jon Meacham.
Yet Obama managed to surpass Clinton. There was this…
Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, president, National Hispanic Leadership Conference: .. The terms pro-choice and pro-life, do they encapsulate that reality in our 21st Century setting and can we find common ground?
Obama: I absolutely think we can find common ground…. [I]t requires us to acknowledge that there is a moral dimension to abortion, which I think that all too often those of us who are pro-choice have not talked about or tried to tamp down. I think that’s a mistake because I think all of us understand that it is a wrenching choice for anybody to think about…. [t]hat nobody wishes to be placed in a circumstance where they are even confronted with the choice of abortion….
Follow-up questions that never were:
And this:
Meacham: Senator, do you personally believe that life begins at conception? And if not, when does it begin?
Obama: This is something that I have not, I think, come to a firm resolution on. I think it’s very hard to know what that means, when life begins. Is it when a cell separates? Is it when the soul stirs? So I don’t presume to know the answer to that question. What I know, as I’ve said before, is that there is something extraordinarily powerful about potential life and that that has a moral weight to it that we take into consideration when we’re having these debates.
Follow-up questions not asked:
And there was this on HIV/AIDS:
Frank Page, Southern Baptist Convntion: … Southern Baptists have been very active for years in sub-Saharan Africa in the HIV/AIDS relief ministries…. But we also are involved in a ministry called True Love Waits [abstinence program], which has been credited by the government of Uganda from lowering the AIDS infection rate there dramatically from 30% to 6%. But we also teach a part of that, that faith has a role in the issue of HIV/AIDS. Do you concur with that and would you elaborate on that, please.
Obama: … My view is, is that we should use whatever the best approaches are, the scientifically sound approaches are, to reduce this devastating disease all across the world.
And part of that, I think, should be a strong education component and I think abstinence education is important. I also think that contraception is important….
I do think that… there is a behavioral element to AIDS that has to be addressed. And if there is – if there’s promiscuity and we are pretending that that’s not an issue in spreading AIDS, then we’re missing part of the answer.
Unasked follow-up questions:
Next Obama discussed his daughters’ sex lives, which I’m posting on separately.
Read CNN transcript here.
[Photo of Clinton and Obama courtesy of the Associated Press]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
It sounds to me like both Barack and Hillary are willing to talk about these issues like adults. If you think you are going to get anything like that out of “Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran” McCain, you are in for a great disappointment.
As far as his Christianity is concerned it is a lukewarm Christianity trying to play both sides of the fence for political gain. To God, this an abominable way of believing.
Revelation 3:14-22
“14To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:
These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation. 15I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! 16So, because you are lukewarm
John McCain’s platform:
Overturning Roe v. Wade
John McCain believes Roe v. Wade is a flawed decision that must be overturned, and as president he will nominate judges who understand that courts should not be in the business of legislating from the bench. Constitutional balance would be restored by the reversal of Roe v. Wade, returning the abortion question to the individual states. The difficult issue of abortion should not be decided by judicial fiat.
However, the reversal of Roe v. Wade represents only one step in the long path toward ending abortion. Once the question is returned to the states, the fight for life will be one of courage and compassion – the courage of a pregnant mother to bring her child into the world and the compassion of civil society to meet her needs and those of her newborn baby. The pro-life movement has done tremendous work in building and reinforcing the infrastructure of civil society by strengthening faith-based, community, and neighborhood organizations that provide critical services to pregnant mothers in need. This work must continue and government must find new ways to empower and strengthen these armies of compassion. These important groups can help build the consensus necessary to end abortion at the state level. As John McCain has publicly noted, “At its core, abortion is a human tragedy. To effect meaningful change, we must engage the debate at a human level.”
Source: http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/95b18512-d5b6-456e-90a2-12028d71df58.htm
Regarding Obama’s comments on AIDS prevention in Africa—I pointed out in a comment a while ago on this blog that there’s a devastating critique of primarily condom-based AIDS prevention programs in Africa in the current issue of First Things (“AIDS and the Churches: Getting the Story Right”).
It’s also worth noting that one of the authors of said article, Edward Green, is a knuckle-dragging Neanderthal who never went to college an anti-gay Bible-thumping preacher the director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project at the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies; the other author, Allison Herling Ruark, is a research fellow there.
Of particular note from the article:
And:
And:
And:
Jill—
What’s up with your blog not accepting “delete” tags?
(In my previous comment about Edward Green’s article in First Things, “a knuckle-dragging Neanderthal who never went to college an anti-gay Bible-thumping preacher” was supposed to have had a line through it.)
And another thing— the “preview” comment feature doesn’t work either (at least on my machine it doesn’t). Anyone else? Bueller? Bueller?
Hey John,
I didn’t know “preview” wasn’t working. Thanks for the heads up. My web guy installed a new version of my software a couple weeks ago, and maybe this is a bug not yet worked out. I’m checking.
As for strikeouts, I’ve never been asked that question. I just checked and you used del and /del. I tried s and /s and that didn’t work either, although it works in my posts. I’ve noticed on other blogs that only a select amount of html language is allowed on comments, like bold and italics. That may be the case here? Has it ever worked for you before in comments?
Why does Obama bring up “the soul”? A religious idea of ensoulment has no bearing whatsoever on when the biological processes of life begin. His confusion over this very idea should lead him towards an “err on the side of life” stance, rather than the hardcore 100% no exceptions stance he has taken for legal abortion (and the radical promotion of it thereof).
It’s a straw man, P.L.A. Obama is trying to make abortion into a “religious” issue so that outlawing abortion would amount to a violation of separation of church and state. So his “hands are tied” because otherwise he would be imposing religion on the people. It’s a slick little way to try and divert people’s attention away from actual science (because that is, of course, on the pro-life side) and onto “religious superstition.”
“Actual science” is not the issue.
Again, I’m impressed with Obama’s willingness to talk to us like adults, and avoid sound bites and pandering. He’s a true leader.
“”Actual science” is not the issue.”
Well Doug, if I had to guess, I would say that if you asked the average pro-choicer what the status of the unborn is, I’d be willing to bet that most of them would say non-human or blob of tissue (up to maybe viability or something like that.) I doubt that the average pro-choicer supports it based on bodily autonomy or non-personhood. I think if more people realized the humanity of the unborn, they would not support abortion.
“”Actual science” is not the issue.”
Well Doug, if I had to guess, I would say that if you asked the average pro-choicer what the status of the unborn is, I’d be willing to bet that most of them would say non-human or blob of tissue (up to maybe viability or something like that.) I doubt that the average pro-choicer supports it based on bodily autonomy or non-personhood. I think if more people realized the humanity of the unborn, they would not support abortion.
Posted by: Bobby Bambino at April 14, 2008 11:08 AM
*********************************
No one disagrees that the embryo/fetus is genetically human but if you would realize the humanity of the woman pregnant and her right to do what she knows is best and her right to make her own decisions then you wouldnt be so quick to be antichoice. But you cant do that because youre certain you know what is *best* for her and her opinion is somehow inferior to yours even if SHE is the one who will be dealing with the pregnancy.
Bobby,
I figure you’d lose that bet that the average pro-choicer would say “non-human” for the unborn.
As for “blob of tissue” it depends on what is meant, i.e. we can all be described that way, after all.
On both of them, if somebody is saying that the unborn here are not human or that they don’t develop the form that you and I know to be there in embryos, fetuses, etc., then I’d argue with them just as vehemently as anybody else could.
And, if somebody, after being informed that the unborn really are “human” and look like so-and-so as a fetus, etc., became pro-life, then I’m cool with that.
Of course her opinion is inferior.
She wants to kill for her own convenience.
That opinion is inferior.
As for strikeouts, I’ve never been asked that question. I just checked and you used del and /del. I tried s and /s and that didn’t work either, although it works in my posts. I’ve noticed on other blogs that only a select amount of html language is allowed on comments, like bold and italics. That may be the case here? Has it ever worked for you before in comments?
I’m not sure if I’ve ever tried posting strikethrough tags on your blog before. Now that you mention it, I don’t think I have.
Let me see if followed by works here:
testing
D’oh!
That doesn’t work either.
test test
Well, shocker, I was able to figure out how to add strikeout. Use the s /s
Huzzah!
Thanks, Jill.
trying it out
In a current Pennsylvania political ad, 3 year-old Hillary Rodham, arms extended, toddles toward the home-movie camera. Hillary’s present-day voice-over explains, the Rodham family cottage, down by the lake, lacked indoor plumbing. It was hardship borne from the start. Yet, more telling events seem to fall by the wayside. Take twenty-seven year old Hillary’s first real job. The upshot: Jerry Zeifman fired Hillary for unethical practices during the Watergate Investigation. Why was Hillary fired?
(Prolifer)ations 4/14/08
Jivin J The new New Atlantis is up and includes a piece by the editors on John McCain’s position on embryonic stem cell research and an article by Yuval Levin on science and the left…….
I don’t know how many times I have to say it – I don’t care what a woman does with her own body. If a radical feminist wants to shoot herself in the head and blow her brains out, who I am to judge?
But our laws should not allow the same woman to kill someone else. I know you pro-aborts aren’t as dumb as you pretend to be. You ‘get it’. You know that we don’t put the life over the unborn child over the life of the mother, but we do put the life of the unborn child over the social life of the mother. But you pretend that you don’t understand the distinction. I think you do understand.
But our laws should not allow the same woman to kill someone else.
John, not everybody agrees with you on when it is “someone else.”
As for strikeouts,
Reggie Jackson is The Man.
Sen. Obhama says he has not thought through whether life begins at conception. Translation: He does not dare do this, else he would realize the horrible error in jugment he has made of ignoring Truth. Or else he really has, and plays dumb. I also cannot believe this is the first time he has heard such a question. If he has not spent time to think through that what, what else has he not thought about?
Sen. Clinton says she does not know why God allows suffering in the world. Where is her Christian upbringing when it comes to understanding that we suffer due (ultimately) from Original Sin and our resulting separation from God, and the concept of redemptive suffering bringing us closer to Him? If God prevented all suffering, who would turn to Him?
Sen. Clinton also recounts her memories of the Esther as one of the few examples in the bible of a woman taking a chance for her faith… I guess if she answered ‘Mary’ (duh!) she would only alienate those of the Jewish faith and then also those Protestants that think “too much emphasis” is placed on Our Lady.
I have heard quite enough to know that I do not want either of these candidates in the white house.
But our laws should not allow the same woman to kill someone else.
John, not everybody agrees with you on when it is “someone else.”
Posted by: Doug at April 14, 2008 11:21 PM
So did you read the “Aborted Socrates”, yet, or just skim it?
You’re missing out if you don’t read it in full. One of the characters is named “Pop Syke” (he’s a Psychiatrist). Get it?
Janet, only thing I’ve done is read some reviews of it.
Farah: “Life, a tricky issue for Obama to stomach”
by Joseph Farah, CEO of WorldNetDaily.com, yesterday: Barack Obama is so confident, so well-spoken, so self-assured, so articulate. Most of the time. If you want to see Barack Obama uneasy, at a loss for words, tentative, halting, just ask him…