Thursday, June 12, 2008

The Abortion Question


Catholics cannot fully embrace Senator Obama's views on abortion policy. John McCain's views also fall short from a Catholic perspective. The following is an interesting commentary by a writer who is not an activist on this question but a polling expert. Its offered for what its worth:

Democrats and John McCain

A Commentary By Froma Harrop
Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Hillary Clinton's blessing notwithstanding, many of the New York senator's supporters will resist the handover to Barack Obama. The sexism that permeated the recent campaign still rankles, and John McCain is far from the standard-issue Republican they instinctively vote against.
A big sticking point for wavering Democrats will be McCain’s position on reproductive rights. Clinton's backers are overwhelmingly pro-choice, and they’ll want to know this: Would McCain stock the Supreme Court with foes of Roe v. Wade? The 1973 decision guarantees a right to abortion.

The answer is unclear but probably "no." While McCain has positioned himself as "pro-life" during this campaign, his statements over the years show considerable latitude on the issue.
In a 1999 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board, McCain said, "I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America" to undergo "illegal and dangerous operations."

George W. Bush turned that statement against him in the 2000 race for the GOP nomination. The National Right to Life Committee ran ads denouncing McCain -- one reason he lost the important South Carolina primary to Bush.

Addressing conservative South Carolinians last year, McCain said that Roe should be overturned. Primary politics or a change of mind? The former is my guess -- and also that in his current pursuit of Hillary Democrats we may see a softening of that position.
Whatever McCain really thinks, the chances that he would submerge his presidency in the maelstrom of abortion politics seem slim. Partisan battles over court nominees aren't his thing, either.

McCain played a central role in the Gang of 14 -- the seven Democratic and seven Republican senators who joined hands to find common ground on court appointments. For his efforts at compromise, McCain took a pummeling from the right wing. Note that Obama, the self-styled foe of division, declined to join the bipartisan group.

And if a President McCain did put forth a controversial candidate, the Democratic majority in the Senate -- sure to grow after the upcoming election -- would put a quick end to the idea. That's why McCain would probably choose a cipher, as had some of his Republican predecessors. Ronald Reagan gave us Sandra Day O'Connor, and George H.W. Bush picked David Souter. Both justices were essentially friendly to Roe.

Obama is no doubt pro-choice, but on the issue, he's hardly been a profile in courage. As an Illinois state senator, he famously voted "present" on anti-choice legislation. Voting "present" is a tactic used to express disapproval without actually taking a stand.

In February, Bonnie Grabenhofer, the president of the Illinois National Organization for Women (and a Clinton supporter) wrote: "We made it clear at the time that we disagreed with the strategy. ... Voting present doesn't provide a platform from which to show leadership and say with conviction that we support a woman's right to choose and these bills are unacceptable."
For someone representing Obama's very liberal Chicago district, there was zero danger in voting "no" on an anti-abortion bill. He almost certainly voted "present" as political cover should he run for higher office and need to appeal to a wider base of voters. And run for higher office he soon did.

Nowadays, most abortion fights center on regulations. The movement to ban the procedure outright suffered a disastrous blow in 2006, when the conservative voters of South Dakota threw out a state law written to do just that.

Curious Democrats will have many questions about the Arizona senator's positions on taxes, health care and war. But they need not obsess on what a McCain presidency would do to Roe. That is one war McCain is unlikely to wage

35 comments:

Rustler45 said...

From Moonbattery.com These are links to Obama's official website. We find so many Catholic values there. hahahahahahahaa

Peeking Under the Rock at BHO's Website

Check out some of the "flavors of crazy" LGF found at the official Barack Obama campaign site:

Barack Obama : : Change We Can Believe In | NEW BLACK PANTHER PARTY

Barack Obama : : Change We Can Believe In | Marxists/Socialists/Communists for Obama

Barack Obama : : Change We Can Believe In | Why does Sen. Obama have to deny his culture to be popular in the U.S.?: Aren't the Nation of Islam Followers American too?

Barack Obama : : Change We Can Believe In | Abdur-Rahim Kashif's Blog: Vice President Keith Ellison

Barack Obama : : Change We Can Believe In | Wilma's Blog: Hillary is not a monster; She is a powerful Illuminist Witch!

Barack Obama : : Change We Can Believe In | Maulayna Bilal's Blog: Why shouldn't Iran have nuclear weapons?

Barack Obama : : Change We Can Believe In | Akido Busandi's Blog: May God Have Mercy on Apostates

Most of the links no longer work. Like cockroaches, once you shine a light on the scarier pages of the Obamessiah's site, they quickly vanish. But then you turn your back, and new ones appear. Yet with the media's slavish assistance, people who don't really follow politics might be convinced that Obama isn't a dangerous extremist backed by hostile lunatics.

On a tip from Refuter Of Liberal Vermin.

Way to go Refuter!

Rustler45 said...

I think we need a new name for this site. We can call it COMMUNIST AND ISLAMIC WACKOS FOR OBAMA. I think that purdy much covers all of you For Obama Lunatics.

Rustler45 said...

All three of you.

Rustler45 said...

"Catholics cannot fully embrace Senator Obama's views on abortion policy."

Oh really?? And which part can they embrace?

"John McCain's views also fall short from a Catholic perspective."

Yeah, but he is not a megalomaniac abortionist,and we're not here to critique McCain.

"The following is an interesting commentary by a writer who is not an activist on this question but a polling expert. Its offered for what its worth:"

Yeah, for what it's worth. And they really expect us to believe he's not an activist? Get real.

"The sexism that permeated the recent campaign still rankles..."

Oh tooooooo bad. "Sexism" that is just sooooooo hoooorible.

Hey they wanted sex in everything now they have and they don't want it. What's with that?

If you want sex you gotta expect sexism. More mixed up confused thinking from the left.

"Obama is no doubt pro-choice, but on the issue, he's hardly been a profile in courage."

O, dat meens Catolicos can bote fer heem! Arriba, arriba. -Pedro

OK, let me clear this up. We have McCain who is a typical liberal Democrat running on a Republican ticket and you people don't like him because????

Milehimama said...

I kind of wonder, is this blog Catholics for Obama, or Catholics Against McCain?

Cuz so many of my questions about Obama are answered by an anti-McCain rant, instead of, you know, the facts of Obama's positions.

Rustler45 said...

Here's what we can expect from an Obama administration:

Canadian Pastor Ordered to Renounce His Faith
In politically correct Canada, a Christian pastor has essentially been ordered to renounce his faith:

In a decision handed down just days ago in the penalty phase of the quasi-judicial proceedings run by the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal, evangelical pastor Stephen Boisson was banned from expressing his biblical perspective of homosexuality and ordered to pay $5,000 for "damages for pain and suffering" as well as apologize to the activist who complained of being hurt. […]
Boisson had written a letter to the editor of his local Red Deer newspaper in 2002 denouncing the advance of homosexual activism as "wicked" and stating: "Children as young as five and six years of age are being subjected to psychologically and physiologically damaging pro-homosexual literature and guidance in the public school system; all under the fraudulent guise of equal rights."
Comments Ezra Levant, an author who has been targeted by Canada's absurd yet frightening Human Rights Commissions:

[The] government now believes that if it can't convince a Christian pastor that he's wrong, it will just order him to condemn himself? Other than tribunals in Stalin's Soviet Union and Mao's China, where is this Orwellian "order" considered to be justice?
This is like a Third World jail-house confession — where accused criminals are forced to sign false statements of guilt. We don't even "order" murderers to apologize to their victims' families. Because we know that a forced apology is meaningless. But not if your point is to degrade Christian pastors.
Adds Pete Vere of the Catholic Exchange:

In essence, the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal is ordering […] the minister to renounce his Christian faith, since his opposition to homosexuality is based upon the Judeo-Christian Bible.
By imposing on Canadians a grotesque parody of a society, liberals are proving that freedom can be handed to you on only a temporary basis. Sooner or later, you will have to fight for it.


There you have it folks. No freedom of speech or religion.

Rustler45 said...

Here's another:

Sen. Barack Obama on Saturday released this statement regarding the 2008 Pride season:

"I am proud to join with our lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered brothers and sisters in celebrating the accomplishments, the lives and the families of all LGBT people during this Pride season. Too often, the issue of LGBT rights is exploited by those seeking to divide us. But at its core this issue is about who we are as Americans."

Not long and normal will be against the law.

Bob said...

celebrating the accomplishments? What accomplishments? Spreading AIDS? You "womyn for Obama" better watch out. Those guys on the "down low" will spread it to you.

Marie-Elsie said...

Rustler,

Your first post is typical of someone who has nothing to offer in the way of a rational discussion and rather will rely on the politics of fear to scare "good white" people away from Obama.

Here is a quote for you straight from Obama himself: " What you won't hear from this campaign or this party is the kind of politics that uses religion as a wedge, and patriotism as a bludgeon – that sees our opponents not as competitors to challenge, but enemies to demonize. Because we may call ourselves Democrats and Republicans, but we are Americans first. We are always Americans first".

You say he is a muslim and I say so what. You apparently do not know any muslims for the ones that I know share very much the values that you claim to have. They are staunchly anti-abortion; they are very homophobic. Unlike you however, they are not as ignorant as other people's faith.

Marie-Elsie said...

milehimama,

What are your questions about Obama. Think before you ask any talking points from the uninformed right.

Milehimama said...

I don't have any official talking points. I have asked in several comments on posts. All I get are McCain rants.

On the Bobby Kennedy post, I asked:
How is relaunching the Great Society going to help our deficit?

I know I posted others but I didn't save the links to the posts.

What I really want to know, is WHAT is he going to change, WHY, and most importantly HOW is he going to change it?

Also, I just can't get past his vote on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. Terrible.

Rustler45 said...

MARIE ELSIE RATIONALIZES: Your first post is typical of someone who has nothing to offer in the way of a rational discussion....

RUSTLER REPLIES: Rational discussion??? In here??? You haven't presented any rational discussion yet. All you've done is whine and take pot shots.

I asked earlier what Catholic values that Obama exhibits. I got NO answers.

I get nothing but insults from Betty/Katherine (they're both the same person).

Here's one of your insults to Bob:

"Feeling inadequate much Bob?"

Rustler45 said...

Marie-Elsie Quotes Obama: "What you won't hear from this campaign or this party is the kind of politics that uses religion as a wedge, and patriotism as a bludgeon – that sees our opponents not as competitors to challenge, but enemies to demonize."

That's great Marie. If he was telling the truth. Know any politicians who tell the truth? It's all words for the sake of winning. He's shown us nothing except his promotion of abortion, homosexuality, etc. He is a snake. His words mean as much as Hillary's.

I suggest that you and Hillary have a lot in common.

MARIE-ELSIE ARROGANTLY ASKED: What are your questions about Obama.[?] Think before you ask any talking points from the uninformed right.

We've heard this kind of nonsense before from the uniformed left. We have questions, but you have no answers.

Keep talking Marie. Give us some more of your ad hominems from the left.

Rustler45 said...

In the meantime Marie:

Obama Opponent Confesses to Racism

Marie-Elsie said...

Rustler,

I have been reading your posts for days and all the insults are coming from you. My post regarding Bob's inadequacies was in response to his assertion that all white women who supports Obama has a Mandigo complex.

I have gone to all the sites that you are referring to in your learned posts and I find nothing but the same drivel that you dish out; innuendos not based in facts but rather in fear mongering.

Marie-Elsie said...

Milehimama,

Here are some of the things that Senator Obama will change:

Iraq: Scale down our involvement in Iraq by shoring up the Iraqui government and holding them accountable for their country's security. Also hold the military and the contractors accountable for the money that they are getting without any clue of deliverables. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/23/world/middleeast/23audit.html?incamp=article_popular

How would he pay for the programs that he wants to bring forth. By taxing the super rich and by ending that war in Iraq. Do you know that we are spending billions of dollars each month in Iraq and that is why we are in the recession that we are in. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/06/obama-hits-mc-1.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2007-11-20-obama-education_N.htm

Obama on healthcare: http://www.thehealthcareblog.com/the_health_care_blog/2008/06/obamas-health-p.html

Hope I have been helpful. I would also suggest that you visit barackobama.com and ask some questions there. As long as your questions are legimate and not in the spirit of driving up fear, you will find countless people willing to answer there with supporting documentation and links that actually works. No these are not paid staffers but rather supporters who takes the time to find out information for themselves.

Milehimama said...

Marie,
I suppose I am simply looking for more details. It is easy to say "tax the super rich". How much tax? What qualifies as super rich? What exactly are we taxing, income? Capital gains? Estate?

How much revenue will this generate? How will we keep the super-rich from simply moving their money to another currency?

End the war in Iraq. What does that mean? Remove all American soldiers? Over what time period? Will we have a presence over there at all? What about Afghanistan?

On healthcare... he says it will be similar to the plan Congress is offered. Will it be adminstered by private health insurers? Do they have the capacity to suddenly insure 47 million new people? What constitutes basic healthcare? Will we go from a "have and have not system" to a "have, and have-more" system, or will everyone have the exact same level of care? What are the income determinants for public assistance? How will we keep it from becoming a nightmare of poor and inconsistent care like Medicare? Will it force all insurers to cover abortion and birthcontrol (FOCA does!) even if they object (Catholic insurance for priests, for example?)

I've read his issues from his websites. Long on promises, short on details.

Rustler45 said...

Fear mongering??? Really??? hahahaha Another liberal line when they are in a corner.

And of course anything you can't answer or embarrasses you is defined as drivel.

Hey Marie, you're still dishing out insults, obfuscating, and not answering any questions.

Just answer the questions and quit whinning.

Rustler45 said...

MARIE HAUGHTILY SAID: "As long as your questions are legimate and not in the spirit of driving up fear..."

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA

Legitimate????

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA

I suppose and illegitimate question would be has Obama been taking under the table donations from the LGBTs?

The "spirit of driving up fear," don't make me laugh so hard.

Another one of those accusatory liberal brickbats. You people are always in fear. Fear fear fear!!!!

Of course you're in fear. Why wouldn't you be? It's one lie after another.

See how much FEAR this question deals you Marie.

What do you think about Obama's plan to allow homosexuals the freedom to adopt?

If you can get through that one then answer this drivel Marie. Everybody else in here ignores this basic question. The FEAR just freezes them right in their tracks.

Where do rights come from Marie?

Rustler45 said...

Marie, here's some more of my drivel. You obviously couldn't answer.

"Alternatives such as birth control and adoption." --Marie

Marie, birth control is not pro-life. The Pill is an abortifacient. All Pills, no exceptions. Don't come back arguing with me about that unless you've done your research. You are voting for Obama. You are pro-choice. That is not pro-life. It is actually worse than pro-abortion.

Katherine said...

" The Pill is an abortifacient. "

So John McCain supports abortion? McCain is a big proponent of Title X family planning.

Rustler45 said...

Katherine, what's that have to do with Obama????

bob said...

McCain is pro-life and anti-gay. he is for a strong defense against Islam. He will cut taxes and get rid of bureucracy. He respects the Second amendment.

Barack Hussein Obama will give us taxes and abortion and affirmative action and more taxes and more abortion and more affirmative action and more affirmative actions and more affirmative action.

Marie-Elsie said...

Rustler,

You need to expand your vision. "Birth Control is not pro-life". I guess whenever someone mentions birth control you only think of "the pill". There are various forms of birth control available. Some even being pushed by the Catholic church. Remember abstinence? The rhythm methods, also known as Natural Family Planning, self-control are acceptable forms of "birth control".

You keep speaking about being pro-life. Are you volunteering with Catholic Charities Adoption Services so that you can help place children with loving families that were not so blessed with children. Are you adopting children who need a loving home?

There are more than one way to being pro-life. You can choose to be pro-life by being in your face with your tactics and bully already scared teenagers into not having abortion or you can be pro-life by "teaching", offering compassion and having a solution that will both help the mother and the child. Or is teaching about self-restraint against Catholic teachings?

Marie-Elsie said...

Milehimama,

I know that you don't like comparison between McCain and Obama but you cannot speak about taxes without the comparison since both candidates choose to compare. Here is a CNN piece on how a McCain presidency and an Obama presidency will affect your taxes. http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/economy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/index.htm?postversion=2008061111

I guess they both will cut taxes. The difference is that McCain gives the lowest cuts to people with lower income while people making more than 2.9M gets the highest cut while with Obama it is the opposite. So unless you are making more than 603K per year, you should not worry about Obama raising your taxes significantly.

Max said...

MARIE ELSIE ,

The problem with CNN's analysis is that it does not take into account capital gain tax rate increases, from the current rate of 15%.

If you have a 401k it affects you, if you sell property that is not your main home it affects you.

Also Obama wants a windfall profit tax on oil companies. Guess what oil companies or any companies don't pay tax they pass along the cost to the consumer or lay off employees. Just another rate hike at the pump.

As far as taxing the rich, do you remember the luxury tax from the 1990's? It put an extra tax on yahts, and other expensive consumer goods under the "only the rich will pay" assumption" luxury item sales went down and the average guy who made them were laid off. A Democratic Congress repealed the tax.

If you tax the rich more, they will buy less, hire less workers and find ways to shelter their money instead of putting it to productive purposes. Just ask Obama's friend Tony"not the man I knew" Rezco.

Katherine said...

The problem with CNN's analysis is that it does not take into account capital gain tax rate increases, from the current rate of 15%.

If you have a 401k it affects you, if you sell property that is not your main home it affects you.


The CNN analyis does include the capital gains tax.

401(k) capital gains are not taxed.

A first home and a second home are exempt from taxation unless you make over a quarter million dollars profit (half a million for a married couple) and do not reinvest it in a new home.

For those with third homes, yes, this is an issue.

Milehimama said...

It is not that I don't like a comparison between McCain and Obama.

My problem is really that I ask a question about Obama, and I get a rant against McCain.

Who says I support McCain, and why can't someone just plain answer a question on Obama?

Max said...

Katherine,

401ks are taxed , when you retire and draw on the investment or make an early withdrawl. Also the health of 401ks are dependent on the stocks that account is invested in. A rise in the Capital Gains Tax will affect the stock market and your 401k. Pension funds are dependent on the health of the stock market.

When I said proprerty Katherine, I was not exculsively referring to a home. It could be non 401k stocks, or other personal property.

Rustler45 said...

"I guess whenever someone mentions birth control you only think of 'the pill'."

Helloooooooo Maaaarie, now tell me, when in political discussions has anything other than artificial birth control been included?

Never.

Marie-Elsie said...

Rustler,

I just did. I mentioned several forms of birth control in my discussion that did not include the pill.

Rustler45 said...

Marie, this must have been you.

A judge was interviewing a woman regarding her pending
divorce, "What are the grounds for your divorce?"

She replied, "About four acres and a nice little home
in the middle of the property."

"I mean," he continued, "What are your relations like?"
"I have an aunt and uncle living here in town, and so do
my husband's parents."

He said, "Do you have a real grudge?"
"No," she replied, "We have a two-car carport and have
never really needed one."

"Please," he tried again, "is there any infidelity in your
marriage?"

"Yes, both my son and daughter have stereo sets. We don't
necessarily like the music, but the answer to your question
is 'yes'."

"Ma'am, does your husband ever beat you up?"
"Yes," she responded, "most days he gets up earlier than I
do."

Finally, in frustration, the judge asked, "Lady, why do you
want a divorce?"

"Oh, I don't want a divorce," she replied. "I never wanted a
divorce. It's my husband. He says he can't communicate with me."

Rustler45 said...

Marie-Elsie said...
Rustler, I just did. I mentioned several forms of birth control in my discussion that did not include the pill.

RUSTLER: Oh yeah Marie, I just forgot. On CNN the other night they were discussing how McCain and Obamma were going to give tax credits for those couples using the Rhythm Method and NFP!!


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAaaaaa!

Marie, you crack me up!

Milehimama said...

Maybe Obama SHOULD give tax credits for NFP users... after all, "organic" birth control is better for fish!
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/124939_estrogen04.html

LOL

Anonymous said...

The biggest form of birth control is ABORTION.