|
From the article: "...At Saddleback, Obama offered the ritualistic support for Roe v. Wade expected of all Democratic politicians,''not because I'm pro-abortion,'' but because women ''wrestle with these things in profound ways.''
This is surely true in many instances. But political Obama won't explain why ''wrestling'' with a serious moral question is an adequate substitute for deciding it correctly...."
Oh, Jonah, as usual, you make no sense at all. In the first place, who died and appointed you the arbiter of "correct" theological decisions? Why should you expect anyone to act according to your expectations? Holding your breath and turning blue will not erase separation of church and state from the Constitution, nor will it give the government the right to impose control over a woman's conscience.
Reality does not always conform to your stuffy little ivory tower world. For instance, a woman who has a C-section is strongly advised not to get pregnant again for a year, to allow the uterine incision time to heal and become strong enough for another pregnancy. Yet no method of birth control is 100% effective. What happens to the woman, her new baby, her husband, and her other children, if she does become pregnant within that year?
If you, McCain, the GOP, and all the other extremists have their way, she will have only one choice. Take the risk and pray. Pray that when her uterus ruptures, someone will be able to call an ambulance. Pray that the ambulance gets there before she bleeds to death. Pray that she gets to a hospital within 7 minutes, which is the time it will take her to bleed to death. Pray that the hospital has an available OB\GYN on the premises to do the surgery. Pray that she survives the shock of the surgery, because there will be no time for anethesia.
That is the reality you consider theologically correct. I beg to differ. And so do the vast majority of Americans. Far better for all of you to take Obama's words to heart:
On an issue like partial birth abortion, I strongly believe that the state can properly restrict late-term abortions. I have said so repeatedly. All I've said is we should have a provision to protect the health of the mother, and many of the bills that came before me didn't have that.
Part of the reason they didn't have it was purposeful, because those who are opposed to abortion have a moral calling to try to oppose what they think is immoral. Oftentimes what they were trying to do was to polarize the debate and make it more difficult for people, so that they could try to bring an end to abortions overall.
As president, my goal is to bring people together, to listen to them, and I don't think that's any Republican out there who I've worked with who would say that I don't listen to them, I don't respect their ideas, I don't understand their perspective. And my goal is to get us out of this polarizing debate where we're always trying to score cheap political points and actually get things done. Source: Fox News Sunday: 2008 presidential race interview Apr 27, 2008
|