Barack Obama on "What Is at Stake in This Election"
43 comments | Permalink
Every evangelical should watch the first 10 minutes or so of this speech by Barack Obama, delivered to Planned Parenthood in July 2007. It contains an impassioned defense of partial-birth abortion.
Note carefully:
"This is what is at stake in this election."
"It is time to write a new chapter in American history."
"I have worked on these issues for decades now."
"This election is not just about playing defense, it's about playing offense. It's not just about defending what is, it's about creating what might be in this country."
"On this issue, I will not yield."
Note carefully:
"This is what is at stake in this election."
"It is time to write a new chapter in American history."
"I have worked on these issues for decades now."
"This election is not just about playing defense, it's about playing offense. It's not just about defending what is, it's about creating what might be in this country."
"On this issue, I will not yield."
posted by JT at Monday, May 19, 2008
43 Comments:
I guess it's not a surprise that he appealed to "our daughters." That makes it seem very human interest and empathetic. Of course, when it all comes down to it, it's about when the baby becomes a human. It's always human and it comes down to murder. In the words of Piper, "There's got to be a better way than killing the babies."
Disgusting.
He wants "our daughters to have the same opportunities as our sons." In the good old days, even today in some communities, a girl getting pregnant means both she and the father will have their lives turned upside down (when they get married).
It's only when the boy goes on with his life to leave the girl an unwed mother that there is a disproportionate burden on the girl -- a big problem in the community that votess Obama 90% or so.
So, he wants our daughters to have the same opportunities as our sons. He implies that they currently don't. Then he tells us about his grandmother who did so well in some company where she started as a secretary (decades ago, mind you). I'm confused. Where's the lack of opportunity? There are more women in college these days than men. Oh, wait...Maybe he means that girls/women who are pregnant/have children don't have the same opportunities because they're busy taking care of the children, while the boys/men who impregnate these women get off scott free. So the problem is irresponsibility on both sides (getting pregnant when you shouldn't). His solution is to kill the consequence of a bad choice (the baby), rather than teach responsibility (abstinence before marriage). Following this reasoning, we shouldn't jail drug dealers or embezzlers or people who commit tax fraud. If you're in a tough spot, you gotta do what you gotta do, right? Steal, lie about your income, get rid of the baby that was just an accident anyway. If only Kenneth Lay would've had the right opportunity!
Also, his appeals to women and "daughters" are extremely manipulative. I guess I should be used to that in politics by now, but it's still shocking.
Science? Education? If we're to prevent teen pregnancy through science and education, what about teaching the science and education about abortion procedures?
At least Senator Obama has framed the debate in the "proper" (grotesque) way.
This is not a medical issue and never has been. There is no debate on the viability of a fetus, when life begins, etc. . . . This is a women's rights issue, period. Planned Parenthood wants women to have the same ability as men to walk away from a sexual encounter 'unchanged' and with 'no baggage'.
That's what's behind "giving our daughters the same opportunities as our sons". I.E., babies are a nuisance, and it's not fair that one member of the sexual relationship has to walk away pregnant.
I really hope McCain brings this up (doubtful) as Obama's stance is at once terrible and scary, . . . because, for the first time, politically, the "cat is out of the bag" on planned parenthood.
I agree with Mike, truly disgusting.
Aaron
*shudder* ...this speech is from the pit of hell.
Stanley Kurtz's article in NRO is very comprehensive on the evasiveness of Obama w.r.t. Wright.
This post has been removed by the author.
Here is The link
Riccardi, before reading other comments (I'm afraid to), more disgusting to me is his professedly evangelical apologists and enablers. If those aren't interchangeables.
This is depressing, but it is also of course politics as usual. Contemporary U.S. political theory is committed to defending individual 'rights' without providing any robust conception of the good. Hence Obama's insistence that "America's daughters" should be able to pursue 'their own version of happiness'.
This is pure acquiescence to pluralism.
I wish only one candidate were guilty of having such a small imagination...
Don Gale and Jayson, your comments are right on. Disgusting.
I hear you, Dan.
However disgusting and absent of justice any act or event is, one can understand it as people "of the world, speaking as of the world, and the world listening to them" (cf. 1Jn 4). What else would we expect from unbelievers? This is their domain.
But when someone attempts to unite the name of Christ with such perversity, your heart drops in your chest because of the dirt of shame that it spreads over that name so worthy of glory and honor... a name so sweet and precious in your ears and in your heart.
Woe to the nation who supports this trash.
But aye, Dan, woe to the person who supports this trash while naming Christ.
Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, recently posted two videos on YouTube in which he describes and demonstrates the two most common abortion procedures, using plastic fetal models, the actual instruments of abortion, and the words found in medical textbooks and court testimony.
You can view these videos at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us_y9GP_-DA (Dismemberment abortion)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBOAPleF1t0 (Suction abortion)
These videos are part of a new project called, "Is This What You Mean?" It aims to educate the public about the nature of abortion and to challenge public officials and candidates who support the legality of abortion to admit what it is. A full description of the project is at www.priestsforlife.org/action/abortion-procedure-revealed.htm.
We in the pro-life community have been fed up for a long time with “public servants” who can’t seem to tell the difference between serving the public and killing the public. This election season, it’s time for that to change. No matter what politicians or voters or Church officials are or are not going to do, it’s time that we who know what abortion is, draw a line in the sand and give candidates and office-holders alike this challenge.
If you will help spread the word by posting these links please email webmaster@priestsforlife.org.
Thank you,
Eileen A. Dover, CNM, MS
Executive Director
PrenatalAdoption.Com
Obama is smooth, but he spoke witha different tone at Messiah College, when he spoke about abortion.
I wonder has he ever seen a partial birth abortion? Or any abortion for that matter.
The other side to this heinous procedure is that it makes millionaires. There's a lot of $$$ in killing humans in the womb; images of God.
When he said something about the most conservative people will agree that we want our daughters to have the same rights as our sons, my response would be that I also want my granddaughters (yet unborn) to have the same rights as my grandsons (yet unborn).
It's so sad that he thinks he's being logically and morally consistent. Praise the Lord for his grace to open our ears and eyes to the Truth.
DJP: "Riccardi, before reading other comments (I'm afraid to), more disgusting to me is his professedly evangelical apologists and enablers. If those aren't interchangeables."
I don't know if it's more disgusting or not, but let's do agree that any "Christian" who apologizes and enables abortion via their support of pro-abortion politicians like Obama is arguably making an unwise voting decision. And let's also be upfront that such votes for pro-abortion politicians are rationalized by these "Christians" by saying that there are other structural institutional sin issues that are just as transcendent as abortion and same-sex marriage and that Evangelicals need to broaden their engagement horizon by reading and signing "An Evangelical Manifesto".
I think everyone has covered it on the various posts, but here's my simple question?
Is anyone REALLY surprised at the state of people's hearts in this country?
While I think abortion is heinous and one of the most disgusting acts humans ever thought up, it doesn't surprise me in the least that Obama, Clinton or anyone else thinks its a "right" to have one.
This may be unpopular here, but, President Bush had a great opportunity to address, if not overturn Roe v Wade. He was a Conservative President, with conservative control in the House and Senate and had two appointments to this country's highest court. Yet in 8 years, nothing. I'm not naive enough to think that the President can just waltz into court and change laws, but I think he owed it to his constiguents to make a better effort.
Just my two cents.
Russ,
Though I share your desire to have RVW overturned. . I think it's a bit unfair to Bush to say that "nothing" has been done. Justin linked to a pretty good article from Joe Wilson on the subject.
The two that come to mind are:
1) the partial birth abortion ban and
2) the born alive act
(you know, the one that says you can't kill babies OUTSIDE the womb. . the one that Obama voted against)
So, those two cases, at least, have been huge victories for the pro-life cause.
Aaron
Russ,
I think you're being a bit hard on President Bush (not that there aren't areas to be hard on him, but this isn't one). You criticize him because the Supreme Court hasn't overturned Roe v. Wade even though he appointed 2 justices, but it's well known that Bush would have needed to replace 3 pro-abort votes on the Court, not 2, in order to overturn it. And when the partial birth abortion ban came up, Bush's justices were the deciding votes to uphold it. So Bush hit 2/2, but he didn't get a 3rd at bat.
Further, Bush did sign a ban on partial-birth abortion, as well as veto funding for new embryonic stem cell research (a courageous stance against a popular policy). Although he could have done more, it's unfair to call this "nothing."
Russ,
Just my two cents
Based on the replies above, I guess you'd better make that "Just my farthing." :)
This post has been removed by the author.
This post has been removed by the author.
donsands said "There's a lot of $$$ in killing humans in the womb;"
scott said "What disturbs me is the silence by many influential "city" churches on the issue of abortion. Search "the poor" or "hiv" on their sites and you will get several pages. Search "abortion" and silence. You can find the names of these compromising pastors yourself. I'll give you a hint- (T.K.). Look at what he and his wife say on this topic. Shocking."
Can either of you provide documentation of your statements? What are the $$$ amounts you refer to? From what source do you get that information?
Provide a link to or give a quote about what T.K and his wife actually say? While I am pro-life, I think it is extremely important that claims we make in our arguments or statements are substantiated by accurate documentation, otherwise we discredit ourselves and leave ourselves open to charges of hyperbole and deception.
The Wall Street Journal estimated that abortion is now a $450 million per year industry. Other analysts have placed it as high as $1 billion. (Source)
Why would evangelicals need to watch this? The vast majority of the ones your referring to already can't stand Obama or any Democrat. They always vote Republican. The Republican can and does, for good reason take them for granted, the same way the Democratic party takes the black vote for granted. They're like lemings for each party.
TUAD: What do you mean when you put "Christians" in quotes? I think I know, but I don't want to make assumptions. Thanks.
Mr. Brown, I just wanted to acknowledge and shorthand DJP's phrase "professedly evangelical apologists and enablers" to "Christians".
Stephen and Aaron,
I wasn't implying that President Bush hadn't done "anything" on the issue of abortions in general, I just think he had an once in a lifetime opportunity to have the court look at this issue and finally get it right.
He is to be commended for what you mention and I do that and acknowledge it. Thanks for the correction.
I will say that I agree that abortion is wrong and horrible and that in order to be qualified to be a Democratic politician you are almost required to be pro-choice. However, Republican politicians are not without their own problems. Since we invaded Iraq there's been a half a million deaths over there. The poor in America seem to get less respect under a Republican president than a Democratic. It has also been said that the rate of abortions dropped significantly under Clinton's administration but rose again under Bush's administration, most likely due to the care and support given to poor expectant mothers under Clinton than Bush. Republicans seem to have just as many ideas that are out of whack and contrary to God's Word as Democrats (torture anyone?). God is not a Democrat, but he is also not a Republican.
Peace in Christ,
Scott
http://www.democratsforlife.org
I encourage watching the second ten minutes as well.
"...half a million deaths over there." This comment is so ridiculous that it is difficult to even respond. As usual the facts don't matter with people who justify their allegience to a group that supports this holocaust of the little ones.
Scott:
"The British government was advised against publicly criticising a report estimating that 655,000 Iraqis had died due to the war, the BBC has learnt.
Iraqi Health Ministry figures put the toll at less than 10% of the total in the survey, published in the Lancet.
But the Ministry of Defence's chief scientific adviser said the survey's methods were 'close to best practice' and the study design was 'robust'.
. . . Asked how the government can accept the Lancet's methodology but reject its findings, the government has issued a written statement in which it said: "The methodology has been used in other conflict situations, notably the Democratic republic of Congo.
"However, the Lancet figures are much higher than statistics from other sources, which only goes to show how estimates can vary enormously according to the method of collection.
'There is considerable debate amongst the scientific community over the accuracy of the figures.'"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6495753.stm
You may disagree with the comment, but it certainly isn't ridiculous.
I find it interesting how propontents from the left wing such as Senator Obama like to tout the right of "our daughters" to have a CHOICE.
One has to ask about the rights of the MILLIONS of babies who have already been silenced by this CHOICE called abortion.
It would be interesting to see how these millions of AMERICANS would vote on this issue if they were given a voice, let alone a life.
An Evangelical Manifesto
...we cannot back away from our biblically rooted commitment to the sanctity of every human life, including those unborn...
The fact that the BBC said it does not make it not ridiculous. It probably gives us reason to be skeptical of the numbers. "If the Lancet survey is right, then 2.5% of the Iraqi population - an average of more than 500 people a day - have been killed since the start of the war."
How are we showing the love of Christ by slandering Obama? His position on abortion is VERY wrong. But that does not justify calling his speech "disgusting", saying it is from the pit of hell, and questioning his faith. Who are we to judge another man's heart? Elsewhere, Obama has claimed he would use federal funding to promote education in order to lower the number of abortions. I hope he does, and I hope Christ moves on his heart to change it on this issue. About Bush's actions... he did pass the two laws and I respect him for that. But he has not done nearly as much as he could have. Let's face it. He could have overturned or bypassed Roe vs. Wade if he had really wanted to. Look at all the other laws he has done that to. I respect him for his efforts but wish he could have done more.And finally, the argument with Iraq is not about exactly how many people have died, its why they had to die in an unjust war.
I am a part of a group called "Pro-lifers for Obama" Currently we are discussing the paradox we find ourselves in, as Obama supporters who hate his position on abortion. We would appreciate your prayers!
Aaron,
How are we showing the love of Christ by slandering Obama?
Slandering Obama? Where?
The man is on a mission to kill babies. Saying so isn't slander.
His position on abortion is VERY wrong. But that does not justify calling his speech "disgusting", saying it is from the pit of hell, and questioning his faith. Who are we to judge another man's heart?
I disagree completely. Anyone speaking on the Joy of Baby Killing* is disgusting. He speaks of how we should kill babies so girls can avoid a lifetime of struggle and that doesn't qualify as disgusting in your book?
James wrote But if you harbor bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast about it or deny the truth. Such "wisdom" does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic (3:14-15). If "bitter envy and selfish ambition" qualified as demonic, I would argue that supporting the slaughter of infants for selfish ambition is from the pit of hell.
I don't know about the man's heart. I do know about the man's words. In this speech, his words were indeed from the pit of hell.
I am a part of a group called "Pro-lifers for Obama"
Why not rename the group Pro-lifers for Obama (a candidate who supports Partial Birth Abortion)?
*Joy of Baby Killing is a fictional title intended to characterize those who, like Obama, are evangelists of abortion.
I think it’s a shame that pro-life folks have had to tie themselves so closely to conservative Republican politics and their angry rhetoric. We lose so much in doing so.
But let’s not allow our commitment to life get in the way of an understanding of the facts:
When a conservative Congress pushed through welfare reform in 1996, a detailed study showed that those reforms were directly responsible for an increase in the abortion rate in New Jersey of 12 percent. Nationwide, while abortion rates among poor women were falling prior to the Republican welfare reform, they have been increasing ever since. Now, poor women are the only segment of the population experiencing rising abortion rates.
Our vote, based purely on the pro-life rhetoric of conservative politicians, has brought us war, capital punishment, welfare reform, increasing poverty (which leads to more abortion), reduced access to health insurance (which increases mortality at all age groups), and other injustices. Has it been worth it?
The partial birth abortion ban? The legislation bans a procedure, not late term abortions which can be effected by other means. Despite all the noise surrounding this pro-life victory, it won’t prevent a single abortion.
Waiting periods, informed consent, and other legal restrictions on access? Abortion rates have been falling faster in states with no legal restrictions on access than in those that have placed significant obstacles to abortion access.
Over-turning Roe v. Wade? After 35 years of waiting, we’re still waiting. Will a spot on the Supreme Court open up? Will a Republican president really use Roe as a criterion in appointing a nominee? Will a nominee, who refuses to speak directly about his or her position on Roe because it violates “judicial independence”, and who speaks only in vague codified language about precedent and stare decisis, ever eventually vote to overturn Roe? So far, it has been Republican nominees who have been the key votes upholding Roe.
If Roe is over-turned, of course, only 21 states—responsible for 27 percent of U.S. abortions—are currently poised to outlaw abortion. That’s a decline comparable to the decline in abortions since the Clinton Administration, by the way. For the rest of the states, we face a protracted state-by-state battle that will easily last another 35 years. In 20 states, responsible for 58 percent of all abortions, abortion rights are considered relatively secure. Two states, California and New York, where abortion was legalized prior to the Roe decision and where abortion rights will never be over-turned, are responsible for nearly one-third of all abortions in the country.
Does anyone truly believe that criminalizing abortion will actually end the practice? A black market for RU-486 and other abortion drugs already exists in some of our cities and these drugs are also available online from overseas pharmacies. What will be the public reaction when the horror stories from botched back-room abortions and misused abortion drugs hit the news other than to bring to a halt efforts to further outlaw the procedure? How will we prevent those illegal abortions once we’ve achieved our moral victory in the courts?
What does it say about the administration of the most pro-life Republican president ever, who had a fully supportive Republican congress for six years of his term that abortion declined at twice the rate under his Democratic predecessor than it did under his own watch? But it’s true that abortions declined by over 160,000 annually in the first five years of the Clinton Administration, compared to only 80,000 in the first five years of the Bush Administration, according to the most recent data available from the National Right To Life Committee’s web site.
What does it say that some of the lowest abortion rates in the world are in countries where it is legal and available on demand, while some of the highest abortion rates in the world are in countries where it is illegal? What does it say that the U.S. still has one of the highest abortion rates among western industrialized countries, in some cases two-to-four times higher than in some of those countries?
What this all says to me is that I have to move past my emotions on the issue and look at the facts. It says to me that we’ve been pursuing half-measures at best, that have still been largely ineffective, while congratulating ourselves that we’re on the side of right.
I’ve come to the conclusion that preventing abortion is about more than political rhetoric and court proceedings. It is about creating conditions in our country that are pro-woman, pro-child, and pro-family. It seems to me that, to end abortion, it’s not enough to be pro-life. We have to be pro-justice, in every sense of the term.
Frankly, the Democrats, despite their unfortunate rhetoric on the issue, will do a better job at that than the Republicans. By creating equitable growth; raising the minimum wage; reducing poverty; providing universal access to healthcare; making child care, education and housing more affordable; improving family leave policies; ensuring equality in the workplace; expanding access to contraceptives; promoting comprehensive sex education and numerous other policies, the Democrats will make this a more just society.
The Democrats, and Obama, will prevent more abortions.
Just so I'm clear - I'm pro-life and believe that life begins at conception. My belief is a moral, religious, and philosophical view. I have no scientific fact available to prove this, nor do I have the legal legs to stand on my truth claim in an American court of law. So, for me to claim that life begins at conception - that abortion is murder - is in fact a claim that has no legal basis, no medical basis, no basis other than my own viewpoint. So, I think Barack Obama's legal argument holds up pretty well here - to make a legal claim that life begins at conception is no less wrong (or right) than the claim that it begins at any other time. I believe it's a violation of civil rights (and the American Constitution) to force my religious beliefs on anyone. So, while I want to do all I can to reduce the number of abortions, I do not believe that a law will in fact accomplish that. Comments? Thoughts? Agree? Disagree?
Ben Vos,
I'm pro-life and believe that life begins at conception. My belief is a moral, religious, and philosophical view. I have no scientific fact available to prove this...
Actually, you do have science behind you. At conception, you have a being that is growing, cells are dividing, organs are being formed, etc...
...no basis other than my own viewpoint...
Don't discount having God's Word on your side. For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. (Hebrews 4:12) There is plenty of scripture attesting to the sanctity of human life.
Your hands made me and formed me. (Psalms 119:73)
I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be. (Psalms 139:14-16)
Your hands shaped me and made me. Will you now turn and destroy me? Remember that you molded me like clay. Will you now turn me to dust again? Did you not pour me out like milk and curdle me like cheese, clothe me with skin and flesh and knit me together with bones and sinews? (Job 10:8-11)
I do find it odd, not to mention despicable, that many people will fight over the rights of turtle eggs on the beach but will not bat an eye at abortion. They have no problem accepting turtle eggs as something special but toss the pre-born baby out with the trash.
So, I think Barack Obama's legal argument holds up pretty well here - to make a legal claim that life begins at conception is no less wrong (or right) than the claim that it begins at any other time.
Think Dred Scott. Because something is the law of the land does not make it less wrong than another claim. Dred Scott may have been the law of the land, but it was still wrong.
I believe it's a violation of civil rights (and the American Constitution) to force my religious beliefs on anyone.
I assume you have a religious belief that murder is wrong. Do you force that belief on anyone? How about rape? Kidnapping?
So, while I want to do all I can to reduce the number of abortions, I do not believe that a law will in fact accomplish that.
You are probably correct. To eliminate abortion in America will require hearts and minds to be changed, and that without coercion.
After thirty-five years of opposing abortion and after fighting liberals, including liberal Christians, what has been the result? Have these conservative Christians brought more people to Christ as a result of their protest or have they alienated people from Christianity? Has Republican leadership or evangelical Christian leadership sought bi-partisan policies to reduce the number of abortions in the United States? Personally, I have studied and seen Barack Obama up close and have heard him say that he wants to reduce abortions within the current legal framework we have, which does not recognize life beginning at conception, as do most scientists as does the Bible.
However, rather than going around and around again, ask yourself this question: Is my support for abortion helping or hurting others want to have a personal relationship with Jesus?
Recent social research by Christian researchers has found that among young people age 18-29, HALF of those who went to church five years ago do not attend anymore, and are most likely to view the church and messages as anti-homosexual (91% of those surveyed on separate items), judgmental (87%), hypocritical (85%), too political (75%), old fashioned (78%), out of touch with reality (72%) and insensitive to others (72%) . These data aren't suggesting that just because something is unpopular, Christians should embrace homosexuality or abortion. What they may suggest is that if half of young people are leaving because of these perceptions, maybe its time to change tack and focus on what Christians can do for others rather than judging those for “lifestyle choices.”
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home