God-O-Meter

God-O-Meter


On Abortion, Obama Echoes Bush

posted by dgilgoff

The conservative pro-life movement has been hitting Obama on his explanation last night for why he opposed the Born Alive Act in the Illinois state legislature. But God-o-Meter thought the bigger headline from the abortion discussion in the debate was Obama’s emphasis on reducing abortion while foregoing any rigorous defense of a woman’s right to choose.Check out this exchange from last night:Compare it to this exchange over abortion between John Kerry and George W. Bush from a 2004 debate:The thrust of Kerry’s response: as much as he might oppose abortion personally, he couldn’t force his personal beliefs on others. The thrust of Obama’s: the goal of reducing abortion is one that’s widely shared by Americans and there are plenty of reasonable ways to work toward it without outlawing the procedure.Pro-life groups view such rhetoric as cynically political; what legislation has Obama ever pursued, at the state or federal level, to reduce demand for abortion?Politically speaking, though, it’s striking how much those themes echo George W. Bush’s response ’04 about building a culture of life, which also de-emphasized the decades old Republican shibboleths about the need to ban abortion completely.6



Advertisement
Comments read comments(8)
post a comment
Tom

posted October 16, 2008 at 11:44 pm


I wasn’t aware of any Republican shibboleths about the need to ban abortion completely. Roughly only 15% of people polled would ban abortion in all circumstances with well over 15% being registered Republicans. If you’re looking for a difference between President Bush and Senator Obama in regards to building a culture of life, Mr. Gilgoff, look at proposed legislation. President Bush was for parental consent laws, a partial birth abortion ban, and no taxpayer funding of abortions. Senator Obama is for signing the so-called ‘Freedom of Choice’ Act which would nullify parental consent laws and partial birth abortion bans while facilitating federal funding of abortion. The difference between the two is overwhelming.



report abuse
 

PakehaTohunga

posted October 17, 2008 at 12:00 am


I think this is an accurate and interesting comparison of Barack Obama and George W. Bush, but, unfortunately, it does not indicate that Barack is moderating his extreme “pro-choice” views. While Bush wants to do everything he can to reduce the incidence of abortion while that unjust piece of judicial activism (otherwise known as Roe v. Wade) is on the books, he’s also trying to re-establish justice by appointing Supreme Court justices who will call it what it is–a travesty–and repeal it. Obama, on the other hand, is determined to maintain this unjust law and will appoint justices to keep it intact, but desperately needs to skim votes from Catholics and evangelicals who would normally vote pro-life, but are panicked about the economy, and are looking for some sign–any sign–that it would be okay to vote for Obama. So, they both sound mainstream, moderate, middle-of-the road. But one (Bush) is working for justice for the preborn infant; the other (Obama) is working to preserve the judicial decree that has taken 48,000,000+ of their lives since 1973.



report abuse
 

Erin

posted October 17, 2008 at 2:42 am


Roe v Wade is not unjust. It guarantees that I have the legal right to make choices about my body, my health, and my life. A fetus is not a viable life, but a potential life. That potential life does not take precedence over the viable life of a pregnant woman. To repeal or overturn Roe v Wade would reduce women to breeding machines. I wont stand for it and neither will many, many other women.
I might add that our planet is over-populated to the point of destruction. Birth control, family planning, and abortion are solutions to the over-population problem. If we solve the over-population problem, we will substantially reduce or heal our environmental problems.
The births of so many unwanted children result in lives lived in poverty, ignorance, and misery. Our high crime and mental illness rates are the consequence of such.



report abuse
 

{hilip Kramer

posted October 17, 2008 at 6:19 am


I am pro abortion on the emphasis that I have a right to make my own decision which is Anti-Abortion. That child is a child of God and no one has the right to kill this child except God and no one else. Let God decide not the woman that got Pregnant, It might not have been planned but God planned it for her and the child, for a specific reason which you or I do not have the right to change the outcome.
What right do we have to kill an unborn child isn’t this the same as Hitler killing off all disabled and handicapped that became a problem for the life of everyone. Isn’t this a killing also, I believe that any one that causes a abortion should be excommunicated from the church in fact the Catholic Church already has this on their books.
Why doesn’t everyone have the same responsiblity, rather then make a hardship on them it should be a blessing upon them.



report abuse
 

Kathy B

posted October 17, 2008 at 8:28 am


Abortion has no place in Federal Politics! This is a matter of state and should not be shouldered by big government as a tool for election. I don’t think that abortion is a matter for debate among people that who don’t personally have to make these difficult decisions. I have these arguments often with people, I am by no means saying it should be used as a means of birth control but their are valid excuses for this practice and to ignore it is narrow minded regardless of religion.



report abuse
 

God-o-Meter

posted October 17, 2008 at 12:26 pm


Tom writes:

I wasn’t aware of any Republican shibboleths about the need to ban abortion completely.

From the 2008 GOP Party Platform:

Faithful to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence, we assert the inherent dignity and sanctity of all human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.

Tom goes onto say:

If you’re looking for a difference between President Bush and Senator Obama in regards to building a culture of life, Mr. Gilgoff, look at proposed legislation. President Bush was for parental consent laws, a partial birth abortion ban, and no taxpayer funding of abortions. Senator Obama is for signing the so-called ‘Freedom of Choice’ Act which would nullify parental consent laws and partial birth abortion bans while facilitating federal funding of abortion. The difference between the two is overwhelming.

God-o-Meter doesn’t disagree. For all Obama’s rhetoric about the need to bridge the divide over abortion rights by working to reduce demand for abortion, there appears to be no evidence that he’s supported legislation aimed at doing so at either the state or federal level.



report abuse
 

Tom

posted October 17, 2008 at 3:26 pm


‘We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.’
Hmmm. If legislation passes that makes clear the 14th Amendemt’s protections applying to unborn children, wouldn’t a human life amendment be redundant (unless the clarity legislation came in the form of another amendment)?
While the implications of this statement may be assumed to mean an end to abortion completely, I question whether the majority of Republican politicians would take this to heart if asked about hypothetical senarios regarding the possible death of the mother in absence of an abortion. After all, some abortions result in a living birth which is why a Born-Alive Act was deemed necessary. I myself think abortion should be done away with completely since I consider it the violent taking of an innocent human life (and am aware that most would consider me an extremist.)
Also, President Bush’s lack of rhetoric deaming necessary the outlawing of abortion may be because he deemed it a mute point, given the makeup of the Supreme Court at that time would have made it impossible for Roe v. Wade to be overturned and for criminalizing legislation to be implemented during his second term. It doesn’t necessarily mean that he would see criminalizing abortion as futile. Just food for thought.



report abuse
 

Sarah-Jane

posted October 18, 2008 at 9:50 am


Watching this debate makes you kind of wonder exactly why we elected and re-elected George Bush.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

Closed for the Season
With Election Day finally having come and gone, God-o-Meter is closing up shop till 2012--or at least 2010. Till then, get your faith and politics fix over at Beliefnet editor-in-chief Steve Waldman's blog. 7

posted 4:32:33pm Nov. 19, 2008 | read full post »

On The Religious Left, Great Expectations
The first priorities for Barack Obama's administration will be the economy and a variety of foreign policy issues. But the burgeoning religious left, which worked so hard to get Obama elected, expects some movement on its issues, including a robust White House office of faith-based initiatives, pove

posted 1:49:31pm Nov. 07, 2008 | read full post »

Howard Dean's Vindication
God-o-Meter wrote a piece for today's Roll Call on the vindication of Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean's much-derided 50-State Strategy, which is largely about reaching out to the nation's more religious voters in the red states: Years before Barack Obama showed that a liberal Demo

posted 2:01:06pm Nov. 06, 2008 | read full post »

A Post-Election Chat with Ralph Reed
Amid today's talk that Barack Obama has narrowed the God Gap, God-o-Meter checked in with Ralph Reed, who spearheaded religious outreach for George W. Bush's 2000 and 2004 campaigns and who pioneered such outreach for Republicans as executive director of the Christian Coalition. What surprised you i

posted 3:09:07pm Nov. 05, 2008 | read full post »

More Innacurate Faith Storylines From the Media
God-o-Meter is struck by the number of faith-based storylines the news media appear to have gotten dead wrong this year. One was the line that Obama was poised to make big gains among white votes, especially evangelicals, who were undergoing a generational shift in their political thinking and reexa

posted 11:53:20am Nov. 05, 2008 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.