ProWomanProLife

You are here: Home / Archives for Barack Obama

Hoping Father De Souza has his facts wrong

by Leave a Comment

Why? Because of this:

[Barack Obama] has said that his first act as president would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, which would eliminate by federal statute any abortion regulations in all of the 50 states.

and this:

…the substance of his abortion policy is extreme and counter-productive. It puts him far outside the American mainstream. So why does he adopt it? Voters can only conclude that Mr. Obama believes in his policy sincerely.

It’s not often I sincerely hope that writers are wrong. Sadly, here, Father De Souza isn’t. Barack Obama is radically pro-abortion, out of a sincere belief. Babies as punishment–that was no gaffe. That’s how he feels. Good thing I’m not looking to legislative reform for any source of inspiration on the topic of abortion–whether in Canada or the USA, it doesn’t look like there will be any relief, any time soon.

Now that’s a debate

by 2 Comments

Can you imagine Canadian politicians discussing abortion like this?

Senator McCain, you believe Roe v. Wade should be overturned. Senator Obama, you believe it shouldn’t. Could either of you ever nominate someone to the Supreme Court who disagrees with you on this issue? 

 

_____________________________

Tanya asks: Did Obama just say he’s supportive of abstinence education?

We should try to prevent unintended pregnancies by providing appropriate education to our youth, communicating that sexuality is sacred and that they should not be engaged in cavalier activity. And providing options for adoption and helping single mothers if they want to choose to keep the baby.”

That does not sound like what a Planned Parenthood advocate should be spouting. Lest we forget…

 

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0__ctD48nfQ]

Yes we can…

by Leave a Comment

…be exactly the same as every other Democrat! Yes we can! A book review of “The Case Against Barack Obama” from The Economist.

If Mr Obama really were the miracle-working, aisle-jumping, consensus-seeking new breed of politician his spin-doctors make him out to be, you would expect to see the evidence in these eight years. But there isn’t very much. Instead, as Mr Freddoso rather depressingly finds, Mr Obama spent the whole period without any visible sign of rocking the Democratic boat.

______________________________

Brigitte watches too many videos: When I saw the title of this post I was sure it was about this amazingly creepy song…

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cv2DpwCbw1k]

________________________

Andrea adds: “Change it, and rearrange it”–Obama’s a home decorator? Um, thanks Brigitte. That song is something special. Now it ends with the word “vote”–but for who? I’m so confused.

Nice

by 1 Comment

This is more the response I was expecting, even from women who disagree.

Journalists, including Canadians, who could barely contain their glee at the sight of the family-values queen turning out to have a pregnant unmarried daughter – as though the two are mutually exclusive – are infinitely more delicate about respecting the privacy of closeted gay politicians, for instance.

Being pro-life is not a seal on a perfect life–and that doesn’t make anyone a hypocrit. We all make plans for our lives. Or try to. And then other stuff happens. Planned Parenthood? That’s a myth.

__________________________________

Rebecca adds: Is the rule now that only politicians whose children are virgins until marriage are fit to hold office?  If anybody believes Bristol Palin is unusual in being sexually active at 17, they’re kidding themselves.  And contrary to the nitwits bleating about the futility of abstinence-based sex ed – we have no idea if she used birth control.  There is no perfect method of birth control.

 

I’m also very, very tired of people pointing to Mrs. Palin’s statement that she was “proud of Bristol for choosing to keep her baby” as proof that Palin wants abortion to be a choice at least for her own daughter.  It’s clear to me that she was referring to the decision between adoption and parenting.  (Although choosing to carry a baby to term and then adopt is no less praiseworthy.)

 

Finally, the great crisis of illegitimacy is about just that – illegitimacy.  Young women aged 17, 18 and 19 have been having babies for centuries.  The difference is that they were married when they gave birth, which the Palins have indicated is the plan for Bristol and the father of her baby.  I personally would not choose for my children to be married and parents quite that young (growing up and getting an education is hard enough work without such steep responsibilities) but the reality is it happens, and it’s not the end of the world, especially if the couple are committed to making it work and have the support of their families and community.

Obama and Palin are good for democracy

by 3 Comments

My guess is that voter turnout will be high for this election in the United States. Prior to Palin being chosen for VP, we had a very motivated group of Democrats who love Obama and will turn out in droves to vote for him. Now we have a group of very motivated Republicans who love Palin (sorry, this ain’t about McCain) and will turn out in droves to support that ticket. The choices are very different, very clear. The fact that both sides love their candidates will push more people to the polls.

This is good for democracy.

(What’s not good for democracy is a political spectrum that blends into one… I’ll let you guess what country I’m referring to.)

Cross-posted to The Shotgun.

This is one confident woman

by 1 Comment

And just the right amount of sarcasm, too. Says Sarah Palin giving her speech at the Republican Convention:

Before I became governor, I was mayor of Wasilla. And since our opponents seem to look down on that experience, let me explain what the job involves. I guess being mayor is sort of like being a community organizer except you have actual responsibilities.”

Ponnuru on Biden on abortion

by 1 Comment

For those of you eager to hear something encouraging about the U.S. presidential campaign: A post at the Corner about Joe Biden’s stance on abortion, which appears slightly less extreme than that of Barack Obama.

For pro-lifers, there is one tiny hopeful sign in the Biden pick. For a long time now, the top ranks of the Democratic party have embraced an orthodoxy on abortion policy that includes support for taxpayer funding of it and for keeping partial-birth abortion legal. The Democratic platform supports taxpayer funding. The three top contenders in this year’s Democratic presidential primaries—Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Edwards—support both taxpayer funding and partial-birth abortion.

Since partial-birth abortion became a political issue during Bill Clinton’s first term in office, every Democratic presidential and vice-presidential nominee has supported keeping it legal (or making it illegal in name with loopholes to keep it legal in practice). When Gore considered running with Evan Bayh in 2000, feminist leaders told reporters that he was unacceptable because he had voted against partial-birth abortion.

This time the feminists said very little as Obama considered Bayh and Biden. For the first time in many years, the Democrats have a candidate for national office who opposes taxpayer funding of abortion. For the first time since partial-birth abortion became an issue, they have a candidate who opposes it, too. It is a less important development, I think, than the fact that their presidential nominee believes that some forms of infanticide should be legal. But it strikes me nonetheless as progress, however painfully limited.

Sorry–no can do–above my pay grade

by Leave a Comment

You can say that? That’s awesome. Now everytime the media/my boss/friends/parents ask me a question that might require thought I have a pat reply in my back pocket.

But his support of abortion, a non-negotiable issue for many conservative Christians, remains a considerable obstacle, and he drew disapproving noises from the 2,800 audience at the Saddleback mega-church in Lake Forest, when he gave an evasive response to the question of when human rights begin following conception.

“Whether you are looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade,” said Mr Obama.

Again (broken record alert): One of the ways to support abortion is to put your head in the sand and pretend you just don’t know what’s going on in there–what’s that body part called–a uterus? Goldangit, it’s just so complicated.

This actually works for many, I might add.
________________________
What works for Brigitte: The story adds that:

Mr McCain, who has always been against abortion, in contrast gave a swift response: “At the moment of conception”. He won a loud round of applause.

And since then, my shares in a Republican winner-take-all scenario have increased slightly. I’m gambling on the University of Iowa’s electoral futures market for the first time this year; we’re using real money and while I’m no particular fan of John McCain I think he will win. One of my reasons for believing Mr. McCain will win is Mr. Obama’s extreme position on abortion. Not my main reason, but a significant one. Wouldn’t that be a hoot to make money by gambling on the pro-life side?

___________________________

Andrea adds again: Incidentally, on theological versus scientific perspectives: it’s the science that is particularly clear. New genetic material for every person begins with conception. We’re all former embryos, my friends. I just might even buy the t-shirt.

Meta