Obama: Paying People to Kill Babies
That’s a strongly worded title, but it’s true and I’m going to back it up. Barack Obama, if elected, would be the most pro-abortion president in history. Now abortion is a touchy subject, and while I stand firmly on the pro-life side of the divide, I understand that Americans as whole tend to be conflicted and mushy about it. (If you’re someone who wonders about abortion, I urge you to watch this video.)
Obama, however, is not mushy in the least: he is consistently, 100% in favor of abortion. A few pertinent facts:
- Obama voted against a bill that would have provided legal protection for babies born during an abortion. Let me say that again: Obama voted against a bill to protect already-born babies. He then lied about it and went on to accuse those who called him on it of lying.
- Obama voted against a ban on partial-birth abortion, where a doctor delivers a baby until all but its head is left inside the mother, stabs scissors into its skull, and then sucks its brains out. In last night’s debate, he claimed it was because he wanted a health exception. What people don’t realize is that this so-called health exception can be for any health reason a doctor wants, including “emotional” health. There’s literally not a single abortion that wouldn’t be allowed by the “health” exception.
- Obama will appoint Supreme Court justices who find a phantom right to kill your baby in the Constitution and continue to ensure that no abortions may ever be banned, not even abortions of viable infants.
- Obama has a 100% NARAL voting record.
- Obama promised to make the first bill he signs in office the Freedom of Choice Act. While abortion is already legal in every state–a woman can have an abortion at any time for any reason at any stage in the pregnancy–this would abolish all state and federal abortion restrictions (partial-birth abortion bans, parental notification, etc.). Not only that, it would require taxpayers to pay for abortions through government health programs.
Let me emphasize that last point, which is the basis of this post’s title: Barack Obama wants to use your tax dollars to pay abortionists to kill babies. This is not a matter of dispute, it’s not a matter of me viewing his words in a negative light; it’s a matter of public record. Now I’m no genius, but last I checked, when the government starts paying people to do things, those things tend to happen more often. Funny how that works.
Now I’ll be straight with you: I’m not just writing about this just because I disagree with Obama on it. There’s plenty of those issues, but this is one that I think should affect everybody’s vote, yours in particular. There are 1.3 million abortions every year. Think about that; it’s like a new holocaust every decade. Obama supports it and wants to spend money for more of it. McCain doesn’t support it, and wants to end it. That ought to affect your vote.
America is, as the Bible says, “polluted with blood” sacrificed not to the idols of Canaan as in olden days but to the idols of Choice and What’s Best For Me. One day we’ll have to stand before God and give an account for how we used the governing power he gave us–our vote. And I can assure you, many of today’s popular answers–one candidate was young and gave better speeches and said “change” a lot, one candidate promised to tax rich people and give me some goodies, one candidate had really nice-looking bumper stickers, one candidate was really popular with the New York Times, Bush was a lousy President, the economy was tanking–well, I doubt God will be impressed.
October 16, 2008 at 7:48 pm
Without a doubt, abortion is murder of innocent human beings, and is morally detestable. I’ve been trying to decide which is worse – supporting abortion, or unjust wars like in Iraq. McCain’s jokes about bombing Iran also make me uneasy. Which is more wrong – the termination of an innocent life, or the termination of the life of an enemy who is equally human and equally loved by God. Both enemy and American soldiers who may be the sole provider for their families are being killed. But I suppose they are volunteers…
I saw a political cartoon (that I can’t find at the moment) equating the democratic process to choosing whether a phillips or a flat screwdriver will be screwing you. That’s about how I feel right now.
October 18, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Well, I can sympathize with you on the screwdriver thing. I doubt I’d enjoy a McCain presidency, but I’m certain it would be better than an Obama presidency.
As for the war argument, I certainly appreciate that, and I respect your conflicted feelings. Indeed, I think it’s really the only scenario in which other political concerns could outweigh abortion that’s remotely plausible in modern American life (i.e. excluding far-fetched “what if’s” like “what if Hitler gets reincarnated as a Republican?”). But let me try to make a few distinctions:
-War is not a black and white issue like abortion. Although there can be both militaristic or pacifistic knee-jerk judgments by many people, there are also sincere, good faith disagreements between Christians when it comes to whether a particular war is just.
-For instance, I don’t think the Iraq War was unjust (which is also different from whether it was unwise), although I think it was mishandled. I also think that regardless of whether it was just to start a war, once we’re in it, we’re obliged to do right–”you break it, you buy it”–and not just leave people to be killed by terrorists and warring factions. I don’t know your particular reasons for thinking it unjust, so I’ll refrain from saying more.
-As for the loss of human life, there’s a big difference between a soldier killed in a war with just aims and an innocent baby butchered for selfish gain. Granted, even the best of wars are messy and are, like all human endeavors, tainted by sin. But I think that an honest look at the conduct of the modern U.S. military would show that it is among the best in history at trying to limit death and destruction. And while we can say in Iraq that the status quo is royally screwed up (although it’s getting better), we have to remember that it was royally screwed up to begin with. It’s quite possible that our intervention there will end up reducing the loss of human life in the long run.
-However, even if the damage done by war was equal (or even worse) than that done by abortion, the scale is different. Indeed, the high end estimates of ALL deaths in Iraq for the entire war don’t even match that done in 1 year by abortion.
-As for McCain, distasteful Beach Boys jokes aside, he’s not indicated that he’s itching to go start wars willy-nilly. It’s certainly possible we’d go to war on his watch, although I’d guess it would be a just war, due to provocation by Iran (which, BTW, Obama wouldn’t be able to ignore either without disastrous consequences). So we have the possibility of war, and one that would likely be provoked by the other side, as an uncertain possibility.
On the other hand, we have Obama explicitly promising to promote abortion, and with the power to nominate Supreme Court justices that would allow no restrictions on abortion. There is a 100% probability he would do that. At a bare minimum, he would be promoting abortion for 4-8 years. Not to mention, with overwhelming Democratic control of Congress, there’d be no one at all to check Obama (or the other way around). And, God forbid, were 1 or 2 conservative justices to leave the Court, he could guarantee completely unrestricted abortion for another generation. So you have a shaky and uncertain possibility of a lesser evil (which Obama quite possibly couldn’t prevent) vs. a 100% probability of a worse evil plus the chance for even more damaging developments.
November 3, 2008 at 2:50 am
[...] As my final pre-election post, I’d like to ask anyone supporting Obama–who wants to use your tax money to pay abortionists to kill babies–a simple question: how many innocents would you willingly see murdered in order to see his [...]