Thank you, Charles Stanley for a well reasoned, sensitive, informed, politically astute essay.
Asinus Gravisof TX2:12PM May 01, 2009
Obama is clearly not an "abortion on demand" president. He shares with all Christians a dislike for abortion as a means of birth control. The difference between him and fundamentalists of both Catholic and Protestant stripe is in how we reduce and hopefully eliminate the need for most abortions.
The Christian right's strategy has clearly failed. They thought if they made a Faustian deal with the Republican Party, they could give their support in exchange for the promise to appoint anti-abortion justices to the supreme court, overturn Roe v, Wade, and eleiminate abortion by criminalizing it. The trouble with this turned out to be that, in exchange for this, the Church had to support harsh economic policies that favored the rich and created poverty. Poverty is a factor in increase in abortions, which is why the number of abortions reduced most sharply during the Clinton Administration, not Reagan or either Bush (In fact, Bush vetoed the Family leave act, which required large companies to give female employees unpaid maternity leave, and end the practice of replacing, at lower pay, female employees who take time off to have a baby. The FLA would have done a lot to reduce the number of abortions, and George Bush vetoed it)
Obama's belief is that we must reduce the number of abortions, yet not return to the day when women's biology could be used against them The fundamentalists don't care about this. The subjugation of women is something the Catholic church practices openly (and barring women from places of authority in the hierarchy is a matter of doctrine), and the Focus-on the-Family type of protestant fundamentalists teach the submission of women to men as a priciple they think comes from the Bible.
This is where the real difference lies. The irony is that by supporting the political right's oppressive economic policies, the religious right is likely responsible for perhaps millions of abortions that may not have been otherwise performed.
If the Catholic and Protestant fundamentalist truly cared about the lives of unborn children, they would embrace Barack Obama, and join him in open dialogue about this very complex issue. But I am not sure the children is what they care about. These are men, frightened to death of women's power.
Charles Stanleyof IN9:09PM April 30, 2009
Its not just "some fraction of Catholics" who care about the Notre Dame issue, its many. Respecting life is a fundamental issue for us and it is offensive when Catholic universities choose to honor prominent pro-choice individuals.
You cannot say "its not about the babies" for all Republicans, there are politicians who legitimately care about defending human life, especially in its most vulnerable stage--before birth.
The Freedom of Choice Act is immoral, unethical, and should be considered illegal. Roe v. Wade was a flawed decision. Everyone is entitled to life, as it stated right in the Declaration of Independence.Our government should protect all life at all its stages, regardless of age, condition, or any other circumstances, and I pray that is what is done at local, state, and national levels.
SomeoneWhoLovesLifeof CT4:31PM April 30, 2009
if the Congress has not passed it. By saying it is not his highest legislative priority, Obama did not say he wouldn't sign it. He will, if he ever gets it. BUT, passing it is for Congress to get done, not Obama.
As for the Notre Dame dust-up, nobody cares but some fraction of the Catholics.
As for reducing the number of abortions and teen pregnancies, the Republicans absolutely do not give a hoot on this one.
If they did, they'd embrace the President and form a coalition. Hint: It's not about the babies for them. It's about them thinking they retain some imaginary moral high ground to justify what Corpublicans have otherwise done to the country these last 8 years and from 1980-1992.
Reader Comments
Back to blog
Asinus Gravis of TX 2:12PM May 01, 2009
Charles Stanley of IN 9:09PM April 30, 2009
SomeoneWhoLovesLife of CT 4:31PM April 30, 2009
Muser of NM 3:20PM April 30, 2009