Barack Obama: Pro-partial birth abortion, among other things

This has been one of my most popular pieces picked up in search engines, so I thought I’d refresh it.

Have you voted?  I voted yesterday, for McCain / Palin.   This election matters a lot.  Yes, God is in control, and He can make good come out of bad, but we should never avoid doing all the good that we can.  And voting for McCain is a far superior moral position than voting for Obama. 

It is not over!  If just 6-8% of the people claiming to support Obama are in the category of “I’m not racist, but I don’t like to be called racist” (i.e., the “Bradley effect”), then McCain can win.  And that assumes no ground is made up otherwise and that the young people actually turn out to vote for Obama.

P.S. The voting was crowded, so the volunteers asked me to tell all the Obama supporters that their voting day was getting moved to Nov. 11.  Just kidding!  Probably!

———-

Also see The scariest part about Obama

McCain is significantly better than Obama in every key area:

  • Pro-life – McCain has a track record of supporting good judges, while Obama is one of the the most extreme pro-abortion advocates I’ve heard of (and that is not an exaggeration – just keep reading).  Consider his bizarre standards for judges: Instead of picking people who can interpret the law honestly, he wants this: “We need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that’s the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges.”
  • McCain has much better fiscal policies.  Obama wants to take your money to give to his pet projects, but donates a pittance himself.  Giving other people’s money at the point of a gun is not charity.  “Spreading the wealth around” is socialism, and it doesn’t work.
  • We’ll be far, far safer with McCain.  Obama is relatively clueless about foreign affairs, would have us surrender in Iraq and set the Middle East progress back 50 years, and is so naive as to think we could or should eliminate nuclear weapons.
  • His energy policies will keep the cost of fuel up for decades.  McCain knows we need to drill now and get nuclear plants started asap.  This will provide jobs, reduce greenhouse emissions and reduce energy costs for us all.
  • Obama is anti-free speech.  Watch how they try to annihilate anyone who dares to even question him, such as Joe the Plumber.  He and the Democrats will want to impose the deceptively named Fairness Doctrine, so they can try to silence conservative radio while leaving the grossly biased mainstream media untouched.
  • McCain pays his female staffers more, on the average, than his male staffers; Obama, however, pays women $0.83 for every dollar earned by men.”
  • Obama is not about change at all.  He is about the same old liberal politics.  McCain is the poster boy for real change – whether you agree with the change or not – and for reaching across the aisle. 
  • Obama lies when saying he’ll reduce taxes for 95% of the people.  Nearly half don’t pay taxes, so it is impossible to lower theirs.  He is just talking about more welfare.
  • He will be pro-gay marriage.  Just wait.

Barack Obama, hero and “savior” of the left, isn’t just pro-abortion, he’s pro-partial birth abortion.   80% of the population disagrees with this stance, so be sure to tell others.  Just Google “obama partial birth abortion letter” or something similar if you want more sources. He is against informed consent and parental notification.  In his world, your junior high daughter needs your permission to take an aspirin but not to have an abortion.

He reveals his deceptiveness and/or ignorance with his latest ads trying to say that McCain will make abortion illegal. But overturning Roe doesn’t make abortion illegal. It returns the power to the states – to the people – and lets them decide. California, Massachusetts, NY, etc. can keep killing the unborn all they like.

He also defended the rights of hospitals in Illinois to let children die outside the womb by repeatedly opposing the Born Alive Infant Protection Act against infanticide and he is against parental notification laws.

He lies over and over on his views.  He is as radically pro-abortion as one can be.  Read this thorough analysisby Randy Alcorn to see what I mean.

In his July 17, 2007 speech to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund he said,

“We know that a woman’s right to make a decision about how many children she wants to have and when— without government interference—is one of the most fundamental freedoms we have in this country. . . . I have worked on this issue for decades now. I put Roe at the center of my lesson plan on reproductive freedom when I taught constitutional law. . . So, you know where I stand. . . The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That’s the first thing that I’d do.”

If you don’t know about the Freedom of Choice Act, it was written by the most radical proabortion activists because they saw informed consent and parental consent laws being passed at the state level. They wanted something powerful that would dismantle anything that could serve to reduce abortions through requiring that people be told the truth before an abortion or before their sixteen year old, who can’t be given an aspirin without their permission, can have an abortion.

Here’s a piece on the audacity of being an abortion survivor.  Remember, Obama doesn’t just see the right of unrestricted abortions in the Constitution, he sees the right to a corpse. If the abortion fails, then that shouldn’t be a barrier to a dead human.

Obama is lying about others lying– will the MSM check the facts and let voters know his real stand on abortion, partial birth abortion (aka infanticide) and his opposition to the Born Alive Infants Protection Act?

Obama wants change . . . except when it comes to abortion as birth control, inside the womb or outside it.

Obama wants you . . .

  • to pay for abortion!
  • to sanction the killing of infants born alive!
  • to believe that pregnancy is a “punishment”!
  • to accept partial birth abortion!
  • to forget his close association with radical abortion groups like NARAL and PP!
  • to endorse liberal activist Supreme Court Judges that support abortion in the 9th month!
  • to embrace a culture of death!

Listen to his own words, plus his silly comment about the question of when life begins being above his pay grade:

He couldn’t be more clear about his plans:

See The Infanticide Shibboleth for more.  Simply put, Obama is super-duper pro-abortion, and pro-infanticide as well.

He doesn’t even hide his hostility towards preborn human beings.  Consider this quote (emphasis added):

“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

News flash: Sex has consequences – emotional, physical and spiritual.  Destroying – and I do mean destroying – the evidence doesn’t take the consequences away.   

Despite being portrayed as a moderate, he is also against traditional marriage, including the Defense of Marriage Act

He has bad theology, thinking that other religions will get you to Heaven (of course, our current President is guilty of saying this nonsense as well). 

More hypocrisy: He wants to take lots of your money for his pet liberal causes, but donates a pittance himself.  Once again, folks, charity is when you give your own money, not when you force others at gunpoint to support your causes.

I can’t believe he threw his grandmother under the bus.  If anyone uttered “typical black person,” their political career would be over.  Yet he gets a pass for saying, “typical white person.”

Updates: Click here for a long list of reasons why he would make a bad President.

16 thoughts on “Barack Obama: Pro-partial birth abortion, among other things”

  1. Joe, although you are not vetted, not licensed, not current on taxes, and not liberal, I understand that the real issue isn’t about you … it’s about Obama’s “answer” to your question … but so many people have already forgotten that Obama is a socialist… they need to be careful what they pray for because they might just get it ………..

    socialism – it’s what we fight for….

    sounds so wrong – doesn’t it .. ?

    Like

  2. Watching the first video, it obviously was beyond the forger’s pay grade to make words and movement of Obama’s mouth match. Very poorly done, but typical Republican style!

    Neil said: Huh? That is Obama, describing how it is important not to burden the original decision to abort by letting the infant live. The guy has sick views, and anyone who wants the facts can find them. But too many simply don’t want to believe it.

    I won’t argue with you about Obama since you lack the knowledge and honesty to arrive at a fair judgement. Just look at 8 years of heavy deficit spending and then dare repeat what you said about a Republican’s fiscal abilities. That is preposterous!

    Neil said: Ad hominem and non sequitor. Obama doesn’t understand supply and demand. That’s a fact. He doesn’t understand the role of judges. That is a fact. Listen to his own words!

    But even more preposterous is your elitist attitude towards religions: “He has bad theology, thinking that other religions will get you to Heaven”

    Allowing that the concept of heaven actually has some reality, do you really believe that your god, whom you deem so benevolent, would ban billions of people that never had a chance of even hearing about other religions – including yours – from entering heaven. Among these people there must be hundreds of millions morally far superior to most of those hyprocrites who call themselves reborn Christians.

    Neil said: You misunderstand Christianity as much as Obama does, but at least you aren’t parading as a Christian.

    The New Testament teaches at least 100 times that faith in Jesus is the only way to salvation. That isn’t what makes it true (the fact that He is God and rose from the dead makes it true), but it does mean that any “Christian” who denies this is either not really a Christian or spectacularly confused on the issue.

    That isn’t elitist thinking, that is simple logic. If a Hindu said reincarnation wasn’t true I’d question their Hinduism. If a Muslim said Mohammad was wrong and Allah wasn’t God I’d question their Islamic faith.

    People will go to Hell for the sins they have committed. It is perfectly just of God to do that. What kind of good judge would ignore such things? And don’t pretend you don’t know He exists:

    Romans 1:18-20 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

    Any god that deserved its name would value honest people who lead lives helping their fellow human beings but otherwise ignore religion for want of evidence much higher than those lying, deceiving, ignorant lot that blindly follows the highly illogical and contradictary teaching that is known as Christianity.

    Neil said: How charming and tolerant of you to say that. Yet you make the same mistake that many do: You make God in your own image. But the created does not get to dictate things to the creator.

    Which of the 200 odd religions that operate under the name of Christianity are you actually referring to when you separate yourself from “other religions”?

    You are taking religious bigotry to the extreme when you believe that you and a few thousand others are the “elected few” who can earn themselves a place in heaven, but what I find most despicable is the pleasure that you get from assuming that almost everybody else will suffer in hell.

    Neil said: Again, you have a fundamental musunderstanding of Christianity. Read every page of my blog and try to find just one time where I said Christians “earn” a place in Heaven. What you’ll find is that I repeat over and over – just as the Bible does – that we are sinners in need of a Savior. We aren’t saved by our good deeds, but by his sacrifice. If we put our faith in him as Lord and Savior, then our sins are transferred to his account and his perfect righteousness is transferred to ours. Then we can be reconciled to God for eternity. None of that is because of any good deeds I do, rather it is in spite of my bad deeds.

    “Yes, God is in control, and He can make good come out of bad”

    If a god were in control there would not even be such as thing as the republican party. Why would a god allow such concentrations of stupidity within one group of human beings?

    Neil said: What an eloquent argument. I didn’t realize that all one had to do was label their opponents as stupid to win a debate. I’ve been using this facts and logic approach.

    The very fact that a person like your present president could carry on his vile policies for the past 8 years is either proof that a god does not exist or it is not in the least interested in our affairs.

    Were a god in control it would have to be held responsible for all those senseless killings and suffering that has been going on even in the recent past in spite of the fact that by now we have the knowledge and rechnical capability of ending all this.

    If there was a god in control, this world would not be in the mess it is in and which to a great extent has been created by those people who claim to know what such a god’s ideas and plans are.

    Neil said: Thus said from a person who supports Obama, who supports completely unrestricted abortions and infanticide and is completely unqualified to be President. Always humorous to get lessons in morality from those who think crushing and dismembering the weakest humans of all is a moral good.

    Like

  3. Neil said: “Yet you make the same mistake that many do: You make God in your own image.”

    Well, ALL gods are created by people the way they want so see them.

    Neil said: That begs the question. You have to assume there is no God to make that statement.

    Neil said: ” And don’t pretend you don’t know He exists:”

    I am absolutely certain that the god you pretend to know does NOT exist. And I think it is higly unlikely that ANY sort of god exists. There is not a shred of evidence pointing in that direction.

    Neil said: Other than creation, design, morality, logic, his revelation, Jesus, etc.

    Christians KNOw that their god exists, Muslims KNOW that their god exists, Hindus KNOW that their gods exist, Jews KNOW that their god exists. And they ALL KNOW that everyone else is deluded ,because they believ in the wrong god, although it is SO EASY to KNOW the REAL god, if only you follow their “teachings”/claims.

    Neil said: I agree that psychological confidence does not make a claim true. And your reasoning shows how your assertion that you know the God of the Bible doesn’t exist can’t be trusted, either.

    Religion is purely cultural. You grow up accepting that god that your parents/priests/teachers instill in you. On rare occasions, when something goes wrong with your socialization, you turn away from the god of your childhood and accept a different deity as then “only true” one. Thus Hindus become Christians, Christians become Muslims and vice versa. That is never a rational decision, the only rational decision possible would be to forsake all of these gods and develop a skeptical method of meeting the world.

    Neil said: That is a self-refuting argument and a straw man argument as well. Using that logic, your atheism is purely cultural. You went to pagan schools teaching a godless Darwinian worldview.

    I rejected Christianity until I was 28 or so. I was persuaded by the evidence.

    Rational decisions follow the evidence. You are not behaving rationally.

    If there were any gods they would have much better means of revealing themselves to humans other than to “speak” mysteriously and incomprehensibly, contradicting themselves from chapter to chapter in books that have been compiled from hearsay and have become more and more distorted over the centuries.

    Neil said: I encourage you to slow down. If you are interested in the truth you can find answers to all those objections. Even skeptics concede that we can be 99.5% sure of what the original New Testament writings said. And research the Dead Sea Scrolls – over 2,000 years old and they proved that the copying process was very robust.

    So it is simply wrong to assert that the Bible has become more and more distorted over the centuries. Your other claims are wrong as well, but I’m not convinced you are really seeking the truth. Check out the Apologetics links to the right if you are.

    Wjy are trhere so many protestant sects? Because the bible is not clear on anything. The catholic church only managed to stay more or less as one, because they base everything on the “infallible” authority of a senile man who has little knowledge of the real world and rule out any serious discussion that could raise any doubts on the validity of their weird beliefs.

    Neil said: Romans 14 and other passages address how we are to handle disputed matters. From this we can immediately infer two things: God knew we’d have disputed matters, and He gave guidance on how to handle them. More here – http://4simpsons.wordpress.com/2008/06/14/disputed-matters/

    I do not agree with Papal infallibility, so you’ll have to take that up with the Catholics. But you might try a different tone if you want to have a real conversation with someone.

    It is hard to take you seriously when you say things like, “the Bible is not clear on anything.” You obviously know little about the Bible and its formation and content. Therefore, you’d be better off if you made serious inquiries before making your critiques.

    If you are so much pro-life as you pretend to be, why do you not call for the abolition of the death penalty and above all, why do you not protest against the US military that by order of your “good Christian” president kills hundreds of thousands of innocent people?

    If someone has sick views it is all those people whose blood does not start to boil when they see what horrible crimes are committed by the “god-loving” people of their own party.

    Neil said: Thanks for asking about the abortion / death penalty thing. The answer is here – http://4simpsons.wordpress.com/2008/07/13/abortion-and-capital-punishment-part-i/ . In short, 20,000 completely innocent human beings are crushed and dismembered each week in the U.S., without anesthetic, while 1 condemened murderer, who is virtually certain to be guilty and who exhausted 10+ years of appeals, is killed via capital punishment. Do you see the distinction there?

    Do you oppose capital punishment but not abortion? Since the primary part of this post was about that, how about getting back to that topic? You are welcome to peruse my other posts on the Bible if you like.

    But the fact is that Obama is wildly pro-abortion and that is disgusting.

    Like

  4. “It is not over! If just 6-8% of the people claiming to support Obama are in the category of “I’m not racist, but I don’t like to be called racist” (i.e., the “Bradley effect”), then McCain can win. And that assumes no ground is made up otherwise and that the young people actually turn out to vote for Obama.”

    You’re actually hoping for racism? I thought this was a “Christian” blog? Well, I guess the ends justifies the means, doesn’t it?

    Like

  5. Joanne,

    Please read first, then type. Or spare me the faux outrage. I’m OK either way.

    How did I categorize these people? They are not racist, but they don’t like to be called racist.

    I’m not sure how you could translate as that meaning I’m “hoping” for racism. Liberals are experts at personal attacks designed to bully people into silence. Sort of like your false attack here.

    Remember, voting for Obama means more black people killed via abortion. The black abortion rate is 3x that of whites and abortuaries target black communities. I’d rather have more black people alive in 4 years. So who’s the racist?

    Like

  6. Jason said “On rare occasions, … you turn away from the god of your childhood …” Hope you don’t mind me chopping part of your text. But I wanted to focus on the word RARE. I’m sure Neil has better information than I do, but I don’t think it’s quite as rare as you might believe. Here in the US, I’ve seen many people raised in other religions come to accept Christ. If you expand that to other countries where Jesus isn’t taught and then see what happens when a missionary visits, it’s totally awesome. Hungary has a (relatively new) large Christian population. I know some folks that went there as missionaries and the people were hungry for the Truth.

    You also said “Why are there so many protestant sects?” (I corrected a few typos). Don’t assume that different protestant sects worship different gods. Many of them are different because they like different styles of music, styles of worship, etc. They may believe baptism requires full immersion, or just a few drops on the head. But they still worship the same God.

    My particular “sect” believes that full immersion (baptism) is the right kind of baptism. But we don’t believe it’s required to get into heaven. We’ll accept those who’ve only been sprinkled (we might dunk them when we get the chance).

    Like

  7. @Neil:

    Now that you have had my advanced course on “why I am not or cannot be a Republican”, welcome to my “why I am not or cannot be a democrat”.

    Why can’t it be enough for Atheist Liberals to just reject religion? Why must they attack the foundation of peoples faith in a psuedo-acadamic tone, yet often show themselves to be intellectually fraudulent at the least?

    Take this comment for example:

    “f there were any gods they would have much better means of revealing themselves to humans other than to “speak” mysteriously and incomprehensibly, contradicting themselves from chapter to chapter in books that have been compiled from hearsay and have become more and more distorted over the centuries.”

    The Bible contradicts itself statement. This generally comes out of late night dorm conversations where generally no one HAS a Bible to show where said contradiction takes place, o.k., as Doc Holiday said to Johnny Ringo in “Tombstone”: I’m your huckleberry Joanne, produce one of these “contradictions” and we can exegetically discuss said “contradiction”.

    Please, use one of your own finding, I tire of Muslims and Atheist using those cookie cutter “1001 contradiction of the Bible” website that have been clarifed soooo many times.

    Looking forward to your comments 🙂

    Like

  8. “They are not racist, but they don’t like to be called racist.”

    If a person chooses to not vote for a candidate because of their race what would you call that person but a racist?

    Like

  9. Please point out to me where I said that anyone was not voting for a candidate because of race.

    The people in this category aren’t voting based on race, but on who the best candidate is. They just feel the pressure of, “vote for Obama or you are racist!” so they might tell a pollster they are voting for him when they realize McCain is the superior candidate.

    It is indeed racist if someone votes against Obama just because he is partly black.

    It is equally racist to vote for Obama just because he is partly black. And it is morbidly ironic that more black babies will die because of his policies.

    Like

  10. Well done DJ, you man of no party. You have to admit though, that to hear such people is like seeing an Andy Griffith rerun. You know what the character is going to say, but they think it’s brand new.

    Like

  11. Yes, DJBA nailed it. I try to be patient with those folks but it is definitely rerun time when they come around. I like the “1001 contradictions of the Bible line.” I often think of them blogging while reading the Big Book O’ Atheist Sound Bites. I usually try to diagnose if they are open to rational discourse and are really interested in learning. It is pretty rare. I used to be a skeptic so I’m sympathetic to the desire to ask tough questions, but the hostile conversations are unproductive.

    Like

  12. I have never heard of empathy being a bad thing and it’s incredible that you think that it could be. A person can be unbiased, honest and bring justice to those who deserve it while also being able to understand how and why the defendant feels a certain way or committed a certain act.

    And how is redistributing wealth a bad thing? Sure socialism has a terrible connotation but socialism is NOT communism and some aspects of it are good, like giving some money back to the people who really need it and regaining the lowered taxes by raising taxes on those people who have plenty of money to spare. The trickle down method has been proven to not work by observation of say… the last 8 years?

    It’s true that Obama doesn’t have much experience when it comes to foreign policy. That is why he actually deliberated and decided that Joe Biden would be a good balance for the ticket as he has a lot of experience on the foreign policy front.

    Why is it not obvious that Iraq is a resource and money hole? Lives are being taken on both sides, and no one really knows why we are in there in the first place. How did Bush successfully make everyone forget that we were looking for Bin Laden? Why has that mission been abandoned? Why are our resources not going towards a quick capture of the man who is responsible for 9/11? We need to fix our problems at home before we go trying to fix everyone elses. How can you be strong for a less well off country if there are numerous problems on the home front?

    I like the fact that Obama listens to others before making a decision, I like that he took the time to really consider a running mate that would be strong where he is weak, and I like that he does not make erratic, impulsive decisions to say… abandon a campaign, and pick an inexperienced woman as his running mate which was obviously a tactic to gain popularity rather than a well thought out decision to make the ticket stronger. And lastly Obama doesn’t use bunny ear quotes when he’s talking about a woman’s “health” I think that was terribly offensive and McCain lost a lot of ground with his remark.

    How could you even make the accusation that he is anti-free speech? If someone continuously accused you of falsehoods and twisted facts about you, wouldn’t you stand up for yourself and explain the truth? And he is against the fairness doctrine, I thought that issue had already be resolved

    It is kind of crummy that Obama doesn’t pay his female staffers the same as men. Although they shouldn’t really be making more either. For the same job, a human being should be making the same amount of money. Women get paid $1 Men get paid $1 Asians get paid $1 so on and so forth.

    “Obama is not about change at all. He is about the same old liberal politics. McCain is the poster boy for real change – whether you agree with the change or not – and for reaching across the aisle.”

    Woah this doesn’t even make any sense. Even if he were for the same old liberal politics…. which he’s not. It would be way more good change that this country would see and we haven’t seen for 8 years. It would be a complete 360 from the disaster that is the Bush presidency.

    I have yet to hear John McCain really explain what change he intends to bring to America. It’s like he saw the concept really working for Obama so he stole the concept of change, but never really gave America his outline for what he would do differently. Which further worries the country that he will just be Bush’s 3rd term, and he hasn’t proven to anyone that he would do things differently. On all of the issues that really are going to effect this country, he has sided with Bush… sounds like a sidekick to me.

    Why is gay marriage so terrible? So what if it’s disgusting, it’s America and our rights should not be trampled on because some people view it as immoral? Morality can’t and should never be legislated. If you’re not into gays, then that’s your prerogative, but they are people too and they are entitled to get the same tax breaks and other benefits that a married couple would. If you love each other and wish to make that kind of commitment, it should be recognized by the law exactly the same way. Even if they have to call it something other than marriage, their union needs to be recognized by the government in a way that will allot the same benefits to them as would be allotted to a traditional married couple.

    I notice that you get all of your sources from conservative blogs and news outlets. If your sources were more balanced and even liberal, it would strengthen your arguments quite a bit, but as all of your information is one sided, it explains a lot about how closed minded some people can be.

    It’s really interesting to me that you said “California, Massachusetts, NY, etc. can keep killing the unborn all they like.” Why get rid of Roe v Wade if something that you’re so against can still be enacted in this country? Proabortion does not exist, let me just say that right now. There is no one in this country who gets his/her jollies by killing infants.

    Do you want to know how to reduce the amount of abortions? You legislate restrictions on the minimum age for abortions. It’s like driving, you have to be a certain age before you can be trusted with the responsibility or the decision to abort a baby. Every woman who even considers aborting needs to be presented with the facts about abortion, how traumatizing it can be and how many women have regretted the act. Everyone needs to be informed of ways to prevent pregnancy, lets be honest with ourselves. In this country, even if it’s against their religion, a person is going to find out about sex and if they’re not informed about ways to prevent unwanted pregnancies and they end up failing when it comes to abstaining, then they might just end up making the terrible decision to abort a baby. Pretty much it all comes down to being responsible and being informed.

    I just felt like these comments needed a little balancing out with the other side of the coin…

    Like

  13. I have never heard of empathy being a bad thing and it’s incredible that you think that it could be. A person can be unbiased, honest and bring justice to those who deserve it while also being able to understand how and why the defendant feels a certain way or committed a certain act.

    Hi Anna. Thanks for visiting and commenting. I appreciate your tone, even though we have differences of opinion.

    Re. judges – They are supposed to interpret laws. Of course there is nothing wrong with empathy but Obama doesn’t know – or doesn’t care – what most 8th graders know about judges. And he’s a lawyer who wants to be President!

    And how is redistributing wealth a bad thing? Sure socialism has a terrible connotation but socialism is NOT communism and some aspects of it are good, like giving some money back to the people who really need it and regaining the lowered taxes by raising taxes on those people who have plenty of money to spare. The trickle down method has been proven to not work by observation of say… the last 8 years?

    I appreciate your concession that Obama’s policies are socialism. It has been tried and it has failed. Capitalism has some hard edges but it works much, much better.

    It is liberal policies that have failed. Liberals have had virtual monopolies on inner city schools and politics for 50 years. Does anyone want to defend those results?

    And how about the Democratic controlled Congress from the last two years? Or those like Obama who took so much money from Fannie / Freddie and did nothing to solve the problems Bush highlighted? Do they bear any responsibility?

    Why is it not obvious that Iraq is a resource and money hole? Lives are being taken on both sides, and no one really knows why we are in there in the first place. How did Bush successfully make everyone forget that we were looking for Bin Laden? Why has that mission been abandoned? Why are our resources not going towards a quick capture of the man who is responsible for 9/11? We need to fix our problems at home before we go trying to fix everyone elses. How can you be strong for a less well off country if there are numerous problems on the home front?

    Obama is running against McCain, not Bush. The question is what to do with the situation we have today. I think McCain will handle it better.

    I like the fact that Obama listens to others before making a decision, I like that he took the time to really consider a running mate that would be strong where he is weak, and I like that he does not make erratic, impulsive decisions to say… abandon a campaign, and pick an inexperienced woman as his running mate which was obviously a tactic to gain popularity rather than a well thought out decision to make the ticket stronger. And lastly Obama doesn’t use bunny ear quotes when he’s talking about a woman’s “health” I think that was terribly offensive and McCain lost a lot of ground with his remark.

    Obama knows that the “health” exception means that there are no restrictions at all.

    It is kind of crummy that Obama doesn’t pay his female staffers the same as men. Although they shouldn’t really be making more either. For the same job, a human being should be making the same amount of money. Women get paid $1 Men get paid $1 Asians get paid $1 so on and so forth.

    I agree with you, and that is typically what you’ll find. The “studies” showing disparaties are biased.

    Why is gay marriage so terrible? So what if it’s disgusting, it’s America and our rights should not be trampled on because some people view it as immoral? Morality can’t and should never be legislated. If you’re not into gays, then that’s your prerogative, but they are people too and they are entitled to get the same tax breaks and other benefits that a married couple would. If you love each other and wish to make that kind of commitment, it should be recognized by the law exactly the same way. Even if they have to call it something other than marriage, their union needs to be recognized by the government in a way that will allot the same benefits to them as would be allotted to a traditional married couple.

    I am sympathetic to hospital visitation rights and such, but there are other ways to accomplish that. By nature and design, gay couples do not produce the next generation of children, so there is no reason for the gov’t to recognize and encourage those unions.

    Gov’t recognition of same-sex unions results in kindergarteners being taught about the GLBT agenda, and I find that to be reprehensible. And it makes gov’t an enemy of religion.

    I strongly disagree about morality and legislation. All legislation is about morality. Politics is all about the ethical use of power. It is all about deciding where we’ll use the force of government to accomplish the theoretical public good.

    I notice that you get all of your sources from conservative blogs and news outlets. If your sources were more balanced and even liberal, it would strengthen your arguments quite a bit, but as all of your information is one sided, it explains a lot about how closed minded some people can be.

    I agree that we have balanced reading. But you are assuming that I don’t follow the liberal media. I check my Yahoo page about 15 times a day which has all liberal news links. I read all of the Houston Chronicle. And on and on.

    But you really just proved my point about the problem of media bias. Those who don’t read conservative outlets like I do get a wildly distorted view of reality – sort of like the 18-to-1 negative coverage of Palin on CBS, NBC and ABC. And the bias of the media is impossible to ignore.

    It’s really interesting to me that you said “California, Massachusetts, NY, etc. can keep killing the unborn all they like.” Why get rid of Roe v Wade if something that you’re so against can still be enacted in this country? Proabortion does not exist, let me just say that right now. There is no one in this country who gets his/her jollies by killing infants.

    You are either for legalized abortion or you are against it. I’m against it.

    Do you want to know how to reduce the amount of abortions? You legislate restrictions on the minimum age for abortions. It’s like driving, you have to be a certain age before you can be trusted with the responsibility or the decision to abort a baby. Every woman who even considers aborting needs to be presented with the facts about abortion, how traumatizing it can be and how many women have regretted the act. Everyone needs to be informed of ways to prevent pregnancy, lets be honest with ourselves. In this country, even if it’s against their religion, a person is going to find out about sex and if they’re not informed about ways to prevent unwanted pregnancies and they end up failing when it comes to abstaining, then they might just end up making the terrible decision to abort a baby. Pretty much it all comes down to being responsible and being informed.

    I agree that women should be informed about the trauma. You are wise to offer that advice. Unfortunately the pro-legalized abortion movement fights that tooth and nail.

    And check out what Obama said to Planned Parenthood in the last video above. His top priority is to overturn informed consent, the partial birth abortion ban and more by signing the Freedom of Choice Act.

    I just felt like these comments needed a little balancing out with the other side of the coin…

    Anna, thanks for sharing your opposing views in such a well mannered way. Hope you come back!

    Like

  14. Anna said “Do you want to know how to reduce the amount of abortions? You legislate restrictions on the minimum age for abortions.”

    I think that’s a good idea. I think a good minimum age is 73…

    Like

  15. Great idea, Randy! If I had a COW (Comment Of the Week) award, you’d get it.

    Another option would be to give the unborn the same 10-15 yrs. of appeals that convicted killers get (plus their own lawyer).

    Like

Leave a Reply to Neil Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s