I highly recommend this article by Robert George, where he clearly and emphatically annihilates the myth that Obama will reduce or even try to reduce abortions.
If more people would have understood these facts before the election things might have been different. But just because he will be our President doesn’t mean we shouldn’t continue to convey the truth on this crucial topic.
George starts by showing that while some people might be charitably considered “pro-choice,” many are not pro-choice at all. They are pro-abortion, and Obama fits that category — just as someone who claimed to be pro-legalized slavery could be fairly described as pro-slavery even if he didn’t own slaves himself.
Some samples:
Just for the sake of argument, though, let us assume that there could be a morally meaningful distinction between being “pro-abortion” and being “pro-choice.” Who would qualify for the latter description? Barack Obama certainly would not. For, unlike his running mate Joe Biden, Obama does not think that abortion is a purely private choice that public authority should refrain from getting involved in. Now, Senator Biden is hardly pro-life. He believes that the killing of the unborn should be legally permitted and relatively unencumbered. But unlike Obama, at least Biden has sometimes opposed using taxpayer dollars to fund abortion, thereby leaving Americans free to choose not to implicate themselves in it. If we stretch things to create a meaningful category called “pro-choice,” then Biden might be a plausible candidate for the label; at least on occasions when he respects your choice or mine not to facilitate deliberate feticide.
The same cannot be said for Barack Obama. For starters, he supports legislation that would repeal the Hyde Amendment, which protects pro-life citizens from having to pay for abortions that are not necessary to save the life of the mother and are not the result of rape or incest. The abortion industry laments that this longstanding federal law, according to the pro-abortion group NARAL, “forces about half the women who would otherwise have abortions to carry unintended pregnancies to term and bear children against their wishes instead.” In other words, a whole lot of people who are alive today would have been exterminated in uterowere it not for the Hyde Amendment. Obama has promised to reverse the situation so that abortions that the industry complains are not happening (because the federal government is not subsidizing them) would happen. That is why people who profit from abortion love Obama even more than they do his running mate.
But this barely scratches the surface of Obama’s extremism. He has promised that “the first thing I’d do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act” (known as FOCA). This proposed legislation would create a federally guaranteed “fundamental right” to abortion through all nine months of pregnancy, including, as Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia has noted in a statement condemning the proposed Act, “a right to abort a fully developed child in the final weeks for undefined ‘health’ reasons.” In essence, FOCA would abolish virtually every existing state and federal limitation on abortion, including parental consent and notification laws for minors, state and federal funding restrictions on abortion, and conscience protections for pro-life citizens working in the health-care industry-protections against being forced to participate in the practice of abortion or else lose their jobs. The pro-abortion National Organization for Women has proclaimed with approval that FOCA would “sweep away hundreds of anti-abortion laws [and] policies.”
It gets worse. Obama, unlike even many “pro-choice” legislators, opposed the ban on partial-birth abortions when he served in the Illinois legislature and condemned the Supreme Court decision that upheld legislation banning this heinous practice. He has referred to a baby conceived inadvertently by a young woman as a “punishment” that she should not endure. He has stated that women’s equality requires access to abortion on demand. Appallingly, he wishes to strip federal funding from pro-life crisis pregnancy centers that provide alternatives to abortion for pregnant women in need. There is certainly nothing “pro-choice” about that.
But it gets even worse. Senator Obama, despite the urging of pro-life members of his own party, has not endorsed or offered support for the Pregnant Women Support Act, the signature bill of Democrats for Life, meant to reduce abortions by providing assistance for women facing crisis pregnancies. In fact, Obama has opposed key provisions of the Act, including providing coverage of unborn children in the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP), and informed consent for women about the effects of abortion and the gestational age of their child. This legislation would not make a single abortion illegal. It simply seeks to make it easier for pregnant women to make the choice not to abort their babies. Here is a concrete test of whether Obama is “pro-choice” rather than pro-abortion. He flunked. Even Senator Edward Kennedy voted to include coverage of unborn children in S-CHIP. But Barack Obama stood resolutely with the most stalwart abortion advocates in opposing it.
Please find time to read the whole thing and link to it.
Also see Barack Obama – pro-partial birth abortion, among other things.
Eternity Matters 
Hi Neil,
The sad reality is that many voted for Obama because he was whatever they wanted him to be. Most of them really don’t want facts to get in the way of their allusion. 😦
LikeLike
Agreed. I was just listening to Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason lament a conversation with an Obama supporter that he had before the election.
He asked her to name the accomplishments of Obama that made her want to vote for him, and not surprisingly she couldn’t name one.
He asked if she was pro-life and she said yes after pausing.
But she couldn’t vote for McCain / Palin because Palin hunts animals.
Very, very sad.
LikeLike
Thanks for this post Neil. I hope congress and the people will wake up to the fact that Abortion kills babies.
The Church needs to continue its unpopular job of telling people of their Sins.
LikeLike
It makes me sick to think evangelicals can even begin to try to justify voting for this man…
It’s either ignorance or they’re false converts…Is there any other option?…I really don’t understand it.
Oh well.
God knows what He is doing.
He’s orchestrating events to glorify Him in ways we can’t even begin to imagine, and it’s going ot amazing to see the King in His Glory in that day.
Looking toward the day when Christ Jesus is revealed from Heaven with angels and flaming fire to deal out retribution to those who do not obey the gospel and to be glorified by those who do.
Your brother in Christ,
Jacob.
LikeLike
Neil,
That IS really sad. Does she eat meat??? This shows how far our society has fallen, that we equate animals with the unborn. WE ARE NOT ANIMALS… WE ARE CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD. WE ARE SPECIAL. WE ARE DIFFERENT. But alas, I’m preaching to the choir, and a very good choir it is!
🙂
Jacob,
Be careful. Voting for Obama, while I see it as sinful, does not mean that they are NOT believers. Does it cause me to question? You bet… but… we must be careful about that questioning.
Blessings
LikeLike
The trouble is, this information about Obama WAS out before the election and it still didn’t matter. He was quoted as saying that he would like to see “unnecessary” ( oh, the irony) abortions reduced and more emphasis on safe sex practices. BUT if it were his daughters in question “he wouldn’t want them punished for a mistake.”
I’ve honestly never seen a man given a complete free pass on every inconsistency. If it were anyone else his connections, relationships, voting record (both it’s shallowness in relation to his tenure AND it’s disturbing far left slant), statements, flip-flopping, and flat out lying, would have been dissected and questioned with no mercy.
His election, while a proud moment from a race relations and progressive standpoint, is a dangerous, dangerous thing for our not only Christian values and principles, but everyone’s general freedom as well. America just blindly handed it’s keys to him…scary.
Sometimes I actually half-way wonder where he fits into prophesy, given the potential “change” he represents and how unquestioningly people seem to support him. Again, just flat out scary.
LikeLike
I know Timothy. I just really don’t see how a person who knew the extent to which Obama was pro-abortion. I understand that many believers could’ve only seen a piece of it or been consoled that it was alright because ultimately reduce the number. I meant a person who honestly knew exactly how far Obama would go. That’s what I’m confused about.
But, God knows who are His. I try to be careful with my questioning, but this is a topic that sometimes makes me passionate. Thank you for reminding me to be careful though. I really appreciate it.
LikeLike
Just as a refernce, heres the transcript from Obamas seech promising to pass FOCA:
http://lauraetch.googlepages.com/barackobamabeforeplannedparenthoodaction
Heres the video, it comes in late during the Q&A portion:
http://www.imoneinamillion.com/
Neil, while I have debated this numerous times with a lot of social gospelists who were obviously pro-Obama (eugenecho, etc), before and after the election-it was always systematically ignored.
Peter tells us that its Gods will that officials are placed into office, I will submit to its authority, yet will pray fervently for Obamas salvation –there it is, I said it – my opionion, not condemnation, is that he could not be authentic in his walk with Christ. I fail to see the fruits.
So now that their man has been elected, the social gospelists move on to the debate of what we can do to limit abortion-because certainly we cant outlaw it. We cant legisalte morality is there battle cry. My point to them is that we shouldnt outlaw murder or rape, since morals tell us they are wrong. Their typical move is to say that abortion is based on “religous” idealogy -my rebuttal is that beheading and honor killings are also based on religous idealogy, likewise vaginal circumcision (mutilation) –I guess those shouldnt be legislated either; you get the point.
So, agreeing with them partially, that abortion cant (wont) be made illegal, my suggestions are to fight FOCA HARD, volunteer at pregnancy centers – defund Planned Parenthood and use those tax dollars for fighting poverty, work training and sexual education -as well as parenting education, especially fatherhood (but then you will get sued by NOW for discrimanation) – all of this is ignored, in my opinion becasue the social gospelists were never really interested in limiting abortion to begin with -its all just justification for their moral relativism.
I stand firm in my conviction yet am desperatly looking for communicating more effectively with these types and try to find real solutions; any advice would be appreciated.
Stay whole.
LikeLike
Well said, Bret.
When encountering social gospel folks I have yet to find one who supports Crisis Pregnancy Centers. They view us as the enemy. But why? We concede there is a choice, but merely want to help people what we think is the best choice, and what the social gospelists insist they believe (i.e., the desire to reduce abortions).
Yet these social gospel folks tend to support Planned Parenthood but not CPCs. Go figure. They tend to ignore the facts and say their plan is to eliminate poverty so unwanted pregnancies won’t happen. I’m serious. You are so right in saying that it is all justification for their relativism.
Maybe they don’t like the fact that we share the real Gospel with those interested in it?
I’m debating one Christian guy ( https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=10760709&postID=9020580146183259216 ) who thinks I’m being too technical in pointing out the scientific fact that the unborn are human beings. But that, of course is the key point in the whole debate.
Your plan sounds good. Just keep plugging away.
Also, see if your church will buy some of Randy Alcorn’s “Why Pro-Life” books for $1.60 each to give out on Sanctity of Human Life Sunday ( http://randyalcorn.blogspot.com/2008/11/why-pro-life-and-sanctity-of-human-life.html ) . My pastor gladly agreed to do so. I’m hoping the pro-lifers will read it to get better informed, and that the pro-choicers will read it twice ;-).
LikeLike
Great post! I really enjoy reading your blog. Keep up the good work. I’ve just started a new blog that will be highlighting the dangers of the secular progressive movement (pro-gay “rights”, pro-abortion, anti-religious freedoms, etc). Unfortunately, most Christians still don’t know what’s going on out there and the mainstream media certainly isn’t covering it.
We’re looking to build a solid group of social conservatives who’ll frequent our site regularly and contribute to some good discussions. I hope you’ll check us out!
If you’ll add us to your blogroll we’ll gladly add you to ours. Just drop us a comment over at our blog so that we’ll know to add you. Our blog is at http://religionandmorality.wordpress.com/
Thanks!
LikeLike