Clinton’s life contradictions from Compassion Forum
Last night Messiah College in PA hosted the Compassion Forum, for “Democratic presidential candidates to focus on the issues of faith and compassion,” according to CNN’s Campbell Brown, who emceed along with Jon Meacham, Newsweek’s religious writer.
Conversation touched on aspects of our issue. It was frustrating that neither Brown nor Meacham had the knowledge, inclination, or wit to delve beyond easy answers. There was this…
Meacham: Senator, do you believe personally that life begins at conception?
Clinton: I believe that the potential for life begins at conception. I am a Methodist, as you know. My church has struggled with this issue. In fact, you can look at the Methodist Book of Discipline and see the contradiction and the challenge of trying to sort that very profound question out.
But for me, it is also not only about a potential life; it is about the other lives involved. And, therefore, I have concluded… that individuals must be entrusted to make this profound decision…. I think abortion should remain legal, but it needs to be safe and rare.
Follow-ups that never were:
In that same discourse Clinton stated:
… [I]ndividuals must be entrusted to make this profound decision, because the alternative would be such an intrusion of government authority that it would be very difficult to sustain in our kind of open society.
Brown followed up with a poorly worded euthanasia/assisted suicide question, “[is it] appropriate to let someone who is really suffering choose to end their life?” to which Clinton responded:
And I don’t know that any of us is in a position to make that choice for families or for individuals, but I don’t want us also to condone government action that would legitimize or encourage end of life decisions.
Unasked follow-up questions:
Finally, re: the euthanasia/suicide question, Clinton stated:
And now we are being faced with a lot of these difficult decisions because of what the world we live in today with modern technology and so much else. And we’re going to have to come to grips with them one way or another.
Missing follow-ups:
If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant’s case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment….
We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer….
After all, we can now view sperm meeting egg under a microscope, Mrs. Clinton.
Read CNN transcript here.
[1st photo courtesy of AFP; 2nd photo courtesy of CNN]
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.
If only we had a chance to grill these Pro-Abort Politicians!
Hopefully the fools will figure things out before Judgement Day. All you can do is pray for them.
Mike
“A man of riches, may wear a crown of jewels.
But the King of Heaven, can be told from the prince of fools…”
‘potential for life’,
hmmmmmmm, I wonder if this is the same as being ‘potentially pregnant’?
If you confess your religious authority is contradicted, should you not err on the side of “potential for life”?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gee, John McCain has stated over and over again that life starts at conception, yet he still suppports embryonic stem cell research.
You guys must really HATE that babykiller!
Actually Laura (hate is too strong a word) but he does concern me…
The difference between McCain and Hillary is the difference between SoMG and Jess. One is a little confused and one is a sociopath.
John and MK,
Thanks for the morning chuckles!!!
Both very good points!!!!!!!
Safe, legal, and rare…sounds like she is right on message to me.
Jill, I sure wish they would ask those questions you posed.
Safe, legal and rare. I’ve heard that before. Only been said for 35 years now, right? 1 out of 3 ain’t bad, eh? Legal.
I love some of the photos of Clinton! Always unflattering.
As far as her 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
Safe legal and rare??
Then why are these yahoos always chanting and campaigning on the “right to choose” mantras with out these words ever being mentioned when they collect their endorsements.
Only when push comes to shove do they ever even step over to say it should be safe legal and rare. This is just more of their bullsh@# rhetoric to try and appeal to a broader base.
Just this last weekend I went to a CD endorsement convention. During one candidates speech, she shouted louder and with more enthusiasm when she stated that she will always support a women’s right to choose. Her supporters cheered and clapped loud and proud.
All I could think of was so you are celebrating with glee the right to kill your children.
It made me sick. Nowhere in her little speech did she make the comments…..safe or rare.
Laura:
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
A man of riches, may wear a crown of jewels.
But the King of Heaven, can be told from the prince of fools..
MK,
I love this…it’s so fitting for Hilary.
Clinton: I believe that the potential for life begins at conception. I am a Methodist, as you know. My church has struggled with this issue.
Clinton’s remarks remind me that several years ago, a zealously pro-life Methodist named Olga Fairfax founded a group called Methodists for Life.
I don’t know what’s become of said group, however, as Fairfax had to resign from it (on account of her having converted to Catholicism).
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 surpa…
Sandy, you already know that many people want to keep abortion legal, and of course most people want it to be safe. As far as the “rare,” what do you think is wrong with that? I’m certainly Pro-Choice but would still rather see pregnancies prevented than abortions take place.
Senator Clinton seems to be expressing pretty conventional pro-choice views. No news here. Oh wait, here it is: “Pro-life web site disagrees with pro-choice candidates on abortion issues” read all about it.
Doug,
I would of course see not at all instead of rare.
These people are hypocrites. They take money and endorsements from groups they vote to keep in business alwhile saying piblically they want abortion to be rare. It’s a joke.
Abortion is big business and fat cats like Trombly make into the hundreds of thousands of dollars making sure the unborn are targeted for murder.
They only say safe and rare when outside of their own political circles. What has NARAL done to make sure the filthy dirty clinics are cleaned up and staffed with licensed medical professionals?
NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is the pro-life watch dogs who out these losers.
I agree. Sperm and eggs are also potential for life, but we certainly don’t need to send every man and woman to jail (or death) for “spilling seed” as the Bible puts it.
Edyt, sperm and egg are potential. Once they combine, a new biological and complete life is created, which is not potential, but actual, which will continue developing for the rest of it’s life. Come on, this is basic stuff here.
The human embryo, upon conception, is complete, and needs nothing but food and water to develop and grow, just as born children do.
The human embryo, upon conception, is complete, and needs nothing but food and water to develop and grow, just as born children do.
LOL!!! Then why don’t you let the little embryo out of the womb to live on its own, if all it needs is food and water?
Edyt, then why don’t I throw my children into a wilderness and see if they can survive on their own? I guess they’re not human either.
Or why don’t I throw my children out in the sea, and see if they can survive? If they don’t, I will know they never were people.
Well, that seems consistent with your argument, so yes, I suppose you can throw out your born children.
I don’t know what you’re trying to say, Edyt.
You argued that a fertilized egg is complete and needs nothing more than food and water. Ditto your children.
Throw them all out to the wilderness, if they need so little.
It is consistent with your argument. I’m not arguing fertilized eggs are complete human beings. You are.
Edyt, really… Do I have to be so specific for you to understand.
Okay, let me make my point clearer. In order for the BODY of the child to physically survive, it needs nourishment, which every single human body on this earth requires to sustain it’s life.
I was in no way implying that shelter, love, warmth in the winter, etc were not important.
The point I was trying to make was that nothing has to be added to the unborn child in order to make it a “full human” (as opposed to a supposed “potential human”).
For example, a sperm MUST have something added to it, in order to go from being “potential” to “actual” human life.
The ovum MUST have something added to it, in order to go from being “potential” to “actual” human life.
But in the case of the zygote, it requires NOTHING to be added to it’s structure, in order to develop into a human being. Everything that is required to make one a human being is there in the human zygote. The genetic information is there. The ability to grow and develop is there. The zygote is biologically alive. The human zygote needs nothing to be added to it’s biological structure in order to turn it from “potential” to “actual”, therefore, it is already “actual”.
Does this clear up what I was saying?
Sandy, despite your ranting, do you really think that Hillary wants a given pregnancy to be ended, versus having it continued, other than in regard to what the pregnant woman herself wants?
I don’t think Hillary has a problem with women preventing pregnancies versus having abortions, and that if the abortion rate declined it’d be fine with her too.
And my point in my 1:28 and 1:29 posts was in response to your claim that the embryo should be able to survive outside the womb, if it is truly human.
I was countering that by saying that would be analogous to throwing my born children out into the sea, and expecting them to survive on their own. The fact that they would not survive, doesn’t make them any less human, than the fact that if you remove an embryo from a place where it is safe, that it will die, means that it is less human.
Doug:
Do you think laws against murder act as a deterrent to murder or should we just repeal all laws against murder? Would you feel safer if we did away with all prosecution against murder.
To say that someone doesn’t prefer abortion but encourages laws that allow and encourage it, makes no sense.
Say it the way it is. Hillary and Obaman are pro-abortion. There’s no other way of looking at it.
(Prolifer)ations 4/14/08
by Jivin J Here’s the full text of Senator Clinton’s and Senator Obama’s remarks at the Compassion Forum. I, like Jill Stanek, wish the presidential candidates would be asked to explain their positions and reasoning on life issues a little…
To say that someone doesn’t prefer abortion but encourages laws that allow and encourage it, makes no sense.
Say it the way it is. Hillary and Obaman are pro-abortion. There’s no other way of looking at it.
Posted by: HisMan at April 14, 2008 3:06 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
…And as long as John McCain approves the destruction of unborn ensouled babies in a petri dish, he’s pro-abortion as well.
HisMan: Do you think laws against murder act as a deterrent to murder or should we just repeal all laws against murder? Would you feel safer if we did away with all prosecution against murder.
Sometimes they act as a deterrent, but overall it’s not much of an effect. PIP has posted good stuff on this before. That said, I’m for keeping the penalties we now have, including the death penalty.
I realize it’s not perfect, but in some cases, as with Jessica Lunsford in Florida – guy kidnaps a nine year old girl, does terrible things to her, then kills her. No doubt here – massive evidence and the guy also confessed. Doesn’t even get into the realm of “doubt” let alone reasonable doubt.
I say nix the appeals process in this case.
……
To say that someone doesn’t prefer abortion but encourages laws that allow and encourage it, makes no sense.
Allowing is not “preferring” nor even being neutral, necessarily. If nobody wanted to end pregnancies, I’d be fine with that, for example. I imagine Hillary would be too. The law doesn’t “encourage” – the motivation is on the part of the woman.
……
Say it the way it is. Hillary and Obaman are pro-abortion. There’s no other way of looking at it.
Eh. Semantic word games.
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…