On Abortion, Obama talks out of both sides of his mouth January 28, 2008
Posted by Paul Edwards in Abortion, Barack Obama.trackback
It would seem Barack Obama’s position on abortion depends on the audience to whom he is speaking when responding to questions about his views on the subject.
In a recently posted interview at Christianity Today, Barack said this about abortion:
I don’t know anybody who is pro-abortion. I think it’s very important to start with that premise. I think people recognize what a wrenching, difficult issue it is. I do think that those who diminish the moral elements of the decision aren’t expressing the full reality of it. But what I believe is that women do not make these decisions casually, and that they struggle with it fervently with their pastors, with their spouses, with their doctors.
Our goal should be to make abortion less common, that we should be discouraging unwanted pregnancies, that we should encourage adoption wherever possible. There is a range of ways that we can educate our young people about the sacredness of sex and we should not be promoting the sort of casual activities that end up resulting in so many unwanted pregnancies.
Ultimately, women are in the best position to make a decision at the end of the day about these issues. With significant constraints. For example, I think we can legitimately say — the state can legitimately say — that we are prohibiting late-term abortions as long as there’s an exception for the mother’s health. Those provisions that I voted against typically didn’t have those exceptions, which raises profound questions where you might have a mother at great risk. Those are issues that I don’t think the government can unilaterally make a decision about. I think they need to be made in consultation with doctors, they have to be prayed upon, or people have to be consulting their conscience on it. I think we have to keep that decision-making with the person themselves.
However, on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade he issued a statement highlighting his 100% pro-choice record:
Thirty-five years after the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade, it’s never been more important to protect a woman’s right to choose. Last year, the Supreme Court decided by a vote of 5-4 to uphold the Federal Abortion Ban, and in doing so undermined an important principle of Roe v. Wade: that we must always protect women’s health. With one more vacancy on the Supreme Court, we could be looking at a majority hostile to a women’s fundamental right to choose for the first time since Roe v. Wade. The next president may be asked to nominate that Supreme Court justice. That is what is at stake in this election.
Throughout my career, I’ve been a consistent and strong supporter of reproductive justice, and have consistently had a 100% pro-choice rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America.
Is it possible to be 100% personally against abortion yet be pro choice? I say yes, the religious right and the political right know good and well that this issue will never be illegal but they keep it out there as a wedge to keep the sheep in their corner.
I hate abortion, but the solutions provided by the right will never suffice.
Shocked!
What did you expect - true and honesty from a Democrat?
He’s taken a play right out of the Clinton handbook and executed it brilliantly. Pander to your audience.
Pixelmaster,
Take your statement and replace the word ‘abortion’ with the word ‘slavery’ . . . does your statement still seem sound to you?
In your own personal existence, at what exact moment did the potential for life end, and a life with potential begin?
Maybe I’m misunderstanding your point, Paul.
I see nothing inconsistent in what Obama is saying here. He says he could, with good conscience, imagine making late-term abortions illegal with a health exception. He says women should be able to choose up to that point, and his voting record has been consistent with that. His views are pretty mainstream on this.
I love it, history is quite clear that Democrats are liars and Republicans are honest and upstanding. Give me a break……..
Skeptimal,
It’s the *way* in which he carefully phrases his words to Christianity Today because he realizes he is speaking to a predominately pro-life audience. It’s not so much that he is saying different things as it is that he is saying the same thing differently.
I like Obama. I may regret it three years into his Presidency, but I think he is the only candidate capable of unifying our country. We’ll undoubtedly find reasons to disapprove of him, but we do so with EVERY President. It is the most thankless job in the country.
I think I understand Obama’s stance based on those two quotes. First off, he wants Christian conservatives to understand that there is a difference between pro-choice and pro-abortion. He’s not promoting abortion. But, agree with it or not, he does think a woman should choose rather than a government. I disagree with him, but I can put myself in his shoes and see it from his perspective as well.
I hope that the pro-life debate will not be the primary standard for your voting decisions. I can understand why you wouldn’t want to compromise your beliefs, but if you looked hard enough, you’d see ungodly practices by EVERY candidate which, if you allowed your conscience to speak up about, conscience would dictate that no one is elected. If it’s not pro-choice, it’s pro-war. If it’s not pro-war, it’s pro-oil and big business. Everyone out there is sacrificing some ethic or moral. With that in mind, please view the candidates and the entirety of their messages before making your decision on whom to support.
Schuyler,
Your analogy is nonsensical; something more appropriate would be to substitute marijuana instead of abortion. This is another moral choice of the individual person. BTW in the case of marijuana I feel the same. Slavery is a completely different topic on a moral level.
Pixelmaster said: “Is it possible to be 100% personally against abortion yet be pro choice? I say yes….”
First, let’s look a little at our Webster dictionary:
pro choice - favoring the legalization of abortion
pro abortion - favoring the legalization of abortion.
So, there is already a confusion when you claim to be pro choice but not pro abortion. Anyway, let’s not talk semantics here.
The big question is: Do you consider abortion morally wrong?
Schuyler is right. You can’t consider something morally wrong and then claim that you are in favor of the government legalizing it.
See, it’s one thing to discuss our preferences. It’s one thing to say: I don’t like Coke, but I’m ok if you drink Coke.
The problem with your view is the main problem of almost any member of the emergent church: truth has no longer the same value. Objective moral values are no longer popular.
If someone believes that a thing is objectively morally wrong, he/she can’t, in good conscience, then claim that is in favor of the government’s legalization of it.
You can’t have it both ways.Truth is not relative.
Can you imagine a German back in Nazi’s time saying that he is 100% personally against the killing of Jews, but yet he is in favor of legalizing the Holocaust?
A morally wrong thing is a morally wrong thing regardless of what “degree” you might want to attach to it.
Ben
Well stated.
don
So the solution is to make it illegal? You realize this will not stop abortions, so we will once again be trying to legislate morality. I hate abortion, but I also think that the world is a little larger than my own viewpoint. I will not let the christian right frame my moral stances on issues. If the right is so worried about legislating morality why aren’t they trying to make divorce illegal. There are many more scriptures dedicated to this issue than to abortion or to the sanctity of life. Christians (rightwing) fight for abortion but are for illegal wars and for the death penalty. I used to be in that fight but recently stepped back and realized my hypocracy. Again, I would never endorse abortion to anyone, but I would not stand in the way of a person who may have been victimized and didn’t want to live with that memory for the rest of their lives day in and day out.
Can I jump in here? Ben you said “Can you imagine a German back in Nazi’s time saying that he is 100% personally against the killing of Jews, but yet he is in favor of legalizing the Holocaust?” That argument and the abortion argument is completely different. The illegalizing of abortion will only put people in jail, it will never stop the practice. You guys on the right are crazy to think it will make life in America better…..
Paul,
“It’s the *way* in which he carefully phrases his words to Christianity Today because he realizes he is speaking to a predominately pro-life audience. It’s not so much that he is saying different things as it is that he is saying the same thing differently.”
You say this as if you don’t do the very same thing. I have heard you on countless occasions proclaim “truths” that appeal to the audiance. This is especially the case when you attack Democrats, then you use the excuse that information is “subjective” when called out.
Iggy,
I have no idea what you are talking about. I speak to ONE audience and don’t try to make my words acceptable. Obama clearly talked one way to the evangelicals and another way to his liberal, Democrat constituency. How that compares to what I do on the radio is beyond me.
Pixelmaster … let’s not change the subject. All I was arguing was that it is inconsistent for someone to claim that abortion is morally wrong and then go and support the legalization of it. That’s it. Nothing more. Plato was right: the problem with democracy is the equality of values. It wasn’t for no reason that our Founders chose an order:”pursuit of life, liberty and happiness” . When you put happiness ahead of life you have a serious problem. If my right to be happy is as equal or more important than your right to live, then our society is on the downfall.
Again, let’s not change the subject. And let’s stop putting people into a box. Let’s stop making sweeping claims about all Christians.
You said that you stopped being a hypocrite. Here is one of Webster’s definition for a hypocrite:” a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings”.
In my opinion, that’s exactly what you do. You state that you are against abortion and then claim that you are pro choice. I would guess, however, based on our discussion that you don’t see this contradiction.
You know, just because people that you no longer admire have a certain “moral stance”, does not mean that those stances are wrong. You should stop copying people, regardless if they’re right or left wing. You should be honest with yourself and God, and see where He stands on all these issues. What would Jesus be? Pro Choice?
Iggy, sure you can jump in … we’re all jumping in here
You said:”The illegalizing of abortion will only put people in jail, it will never stop the practice. You guys on the right are crazy to think it will make life in America better…..”
Then why should anything be illegal? Your argument does not make sense to me. I used to live in a country where abortion was illegal, and let me tell you that it did stop a lot of people from having an abortion. And being pro life involves much more than making abortion illegal. It involves spiritual, emotional and financial support for women that have “unwanted” pregnancies. It involves finding alternatives. It involves solutions. It involves education.
To your second point: “making life better in America” as a result. Depends what you mean by that. Are you a Christian? Then, making life better would mean something different than if you are not a Christian. God made it clear that killing the innocent is a sin. And supporting the killing of the innocent is a sin as well. Is killing the innocent justified if it would make “life in America better”?
NOTE: I want to make clear that I’m not arguing that abortion should be the only deciding issue when electing an official. All I am trying to argue here is that being a Christian and being pro choice don’t go together.
Hey,
Abortion should be illegal just like murder. The only reason why this is debated is because the precedent has already been set in our society, and somehow even though a large majority of scientists concede that it is a human life, it is still considered an “up in the air” question. The idea that abortion should still be illegal for medical purposes is unfounded. It has never been an issue in this country that if a woman is going to die from a pregnancy gone wrong that the baby’s life should be ended, and that we weep over that. That operation could be performed in any ER in the country and specialised abortion clinics are not needed for that. And tell me this, how is the holocaust different from abortion? Someone said the difference is that if we make abortion illegal people will still do it. So what is your point? People don’t pass laws with the expectation that people won’t break them, thats why we have law enforcement and the ‘judicial system’! By the way isn’t the holocaust effectively illegal? Isn’t it wrong to kill someone because of their personal attributes? Do people still commit hate crimes. Yep! So according to you’re logic should we lift the ban on hate crimes?
Someone also said you cannot legislate morality… I am so sick of that ridiculous argument. The whole idea of laws is based upon the idea that you CAN legislate morality. Obviously laws dealing with bureaucratic red tape and such are pretty much amoral. But isn’t making murder illegal, legislated morality. What about rape? or incest? How about pedophelia? If the question is whether or not morality informed by theology can legislated let me say this… Those from the secular humanist wing (liberals, democrats for the most part) who say that theological assumptions should not step into the realm or “secular law”, are THEMSELVES making a theological assumption because they are saying if there is a God (which most of them deny) he isn’t important enought to place moral demands upon us. So you have a situation where they say religious views should not influence secular laws, but that very statement when you analyze the philosophies behind it is a contradiction!
By the way I wasn’t implying that every woman who is told their abortion is dangerous should terminate the pregnancy. I am just saying the option in situations where she is GOING to die, has always been available.
I see no conflict with saying I am personally pro-life, I would not recommend abortion, and I would do everything I personally can to reduce the amount and still say that outlawing it is not the right solution. Once again, I have stepped out of the framework of the Christian right and realized that the issue is quite large and complex. Regarding Jesus, his actions in the gospels tells me he would also be against abortion but I don’t think he would be making his bed with Politian’s to get the law changed, he would more than likely be trying to change individuals from the inside out. There were many unethical laws that were imposed on the Jews at the time of Jesus, he never once spoke about changing them or anything that the Christian right is currently doing…….
Abortion is a moral issue, life and death. The argument that Christians should focus on other topic too is missing the point (like divorce), because this is a issue about life or death. It is important because if you can degrade the value of life (any life), then I believe all other moral issue are at stake of being undermined too. Life is important for where not just this country goes, but where society throughout the world goes.
How can killing a unborn child be a choice of an individual? Should that same individual have the right to kill their kids after they are born if it becomes to hard to take care of them (feed, shelter, etc.)? We don’t allow killing children after they are born, what makes killing them before they are born any better?
Science and medicine today has shown how much that unborn fetus (from even the earliest of stages) is alive and can feel pain, and more. How then can we continue to let these barbaric actions keep happening around us? Life is life, and killing it inside a women is not just a choice, it’s murder.
To say it will only continue so we should ban it is not much of a defense. People need to stand up for the unborn has people before stood up against slavery. The people back then that were for slavery used many of the very same arguments that pro-abortion people use today. Slavery needed to be outlawed, and so does abortion.
May God help this nation and the world to stop killing the unborn. I also pray that more people would stand up for what is right (life) and stop playing the “it other people’s choice, not mine game”. The women has a choice, but what about the unborn child, what choice do they get? Who will stand up for them. the unborn? Besides, if you are reading all of this now, I guess you can thank God that your mother chose life, you think?
Pixelmaster you said: ” There were many unethical laws that were imposed on the Jews at the time of Jesus, he never once spoke about changing them or anything that the Christian right is currently doing…….”
Please remember that their political system at the time was much different than ours today. They did not have democracy. They did not ask the people to make a choice. If given that choice there is no doubt in my mind that Jesus would be pro life. I also agree with you that the radical change comes from inside; however, that does not mean that we’re excused in our public lives. We are not suffering of Dissociative identity disorder (multiple personality disorder). You can’t just turn the switch public/private as you please.
Karl, raises a good question: What’s the difference between killing a born baby or an unborn baby? Why should one be declared to be illegal and the other legal?
Abortion is not a religious issue. It’s a matter of life and death.
Do you remember the Hippocratic Oath (the oath traditionally taken by physicians pertaining to the ethical practice of medicine) written by Hippocrates, the father of medicine, in the 4th century BC ?
Here is something that maybe you did not know. This is a quote from that oath:
“I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.”
How is it that in the 4th century BC the father of medicine declared euthanasia and abortion unethical, and today both practices are acceptable? It was not a religious issue then, and it is not today either. People try to make it sound like it is so they can do whatever they please to do … but make no mistake it was unethical back then and it is still unethical now.
Pixelmaster, I see you talk again in general terms about “Christian right”. Stop putting everyone in a box, and let people define themselves. The Christian transformation starts inside but it does not stay there. It explodes into daily life. Jesus called us to be the light and the salt. Salt, not sugar!
When John the Baptist called out Herod, he was the salt. He did not say:” Well, you know, I am personally against immorality, but I’m ready to support you Herod”.
Let’s stop fooling around and be the light and the salt.
Well said Ben. I could agree more “Abortion is not a religious issue. It’s a matter of life and death.”
OBAMA IS SCARY!!!!!
Those who are against women’s rights to have control over their own bodies just want to go back to the bad old days when women had no rights at all.
Fetuses kill women. Science says they are quite capable of killing the woman, starve her by growing extra blood vessels in her body, causing diabetes and dangerously high blood pressure.
More than 500,000 women in the world die every year from pregnancy and childbirth, mostly in poor countries. That maens lots of children are left motherless, and often die from malnutrition or diseases.
“proLIFERS’ don’t care about real people with real brains to think with, real relatives and children who depend on them, dying for a fetus or a fertilized egg. They have no right to call themselves “prolife” They are pro death of women for an organism with no brain.
Most “prolifers” support the war on IRaq (and other US wars) that has killed hundreds of thousands of innocent poeple. I know “Prolifers” don’t care abuot that -they love the war. What they refuse to admit is that so many women in IRaq have been killed by their party that there is no doubt that they are also responsible for the abortions of many fetuses who were inside those women.