Perhaps he hasn't looked in the mirror lately. I don't say so glibly. But I wonder: how glib is Sen. Obama being with Christianity Today?
For many evangelicals, abortion is a key, if not the key factor in their vote. You voted against banning partial birth abortion and voted against notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. What role do you think the President should play in creating national abortion policies?
I don't know anybody who is pro-abortion. I think it's very important to start with that premise.
Well, sure it is. Otherwise people might get the wrong idea and think that your 100% NARAL rating and unrelenting supporting of abortion might actually be pro-abortion. By the way, just so we're all clear: the prefix "pro" means "in favor of a proposition or opinion."
Does Obama know Wesley Clark? He has stated that he's "pro-abortion rights." How about Howard Stern? Has Obama ever done a Google search for "I'm pro-abortion"? Regardless, props for taking a page from the Hillary's Book of Brazen Double-Talk: "I have met thousands and thousands of pro-choice men and women. I have never met anyone who is pro-abortion." If only Obama, Hillary, and Co. had the guts to simply fess up like some folks do.
Obama's "premise" is essential, because as soon as you give into the "argument" that, "Hey, no one really is pro-abortion," you are engaged in a highly subjective argument over sincerity and intention, not about whether or not the abortion kills a child. Here's what I mean:
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.
I sense a big "But..." coming.
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.
See? It's about sincerity. But this does beg the question: why is this such a difficult decision if abortion really is simply a medical procedure and the fetus is merely cells and tissue, not a baby? Or, in other words, if abortion is not wrong, why try to get around saying, "I'm pro-abortion"?
Our goal should be to make abortion less common,
Then why does Obama always support, in every way possible, making abortion more 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
So sex is "sacred," but the result of sex—a human life—is not? Naw, it's only sacred and meaningful and viable if you want it to be.
and we should not be promoting the sort of casual activities that end up resulting in so many unwanted pregnancies.
If you think that abortion should be readily available to any woman, anywhere, anytime, for any reason, you really have no business pontificating about how "we should not be promoting...casual activities."
Ultimately, women are in the best position to make a decision at the end of the day about these issues.
Strangely enough, when it comes to, say, school choice or gun control or definitions of marriage or property rights, it's rarely the parents of students, gun owners, married couples, or property owners who are said to be "in the best position to make a decision." No, those things require experts, especially judges, legislators, government officials, sociologists, politicians, etc., etc. Just thought I'd mention it. But, more importantly, this simply obscures the real issue (again): is it right to kill an unborn baby?
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.
Never mind that such an argument is clearly absurd when applied to any other moral choice: killing someone, committing rape, using crack cocaine, drunk driving, robbery, making racist remarks, and so forth. For example, let's say that I want to use meth and attempt to argue that "It's my body" and "I'm following my conscience" and "I'm not hurting anyone else." Will anyone take that as a serious argument for using such a drug? But isn't the government, in making laws that prohibit using meth, unilaterally making a decision about it? Of course! The government does it all of the time, about all sorts of things. Again, this is pulled off only because the emphasis, wrongly, is on the woman, and not on the nature of the act and what that act does to the unborn child. (For a far more detailed and systematic elucidation of these basic arguments, see Defending Life by Dr. Francis J. Beckwith.)
Finally, one more quote from Sen. Obama:
I am a Christian, and I am a devout Christian. I believe in the redemptive death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. I believe that that faith gives me a path to be cleansed of sin and have eternal life. But most importantly, I believe in the example that Jesus set by feeding the hungry and healing the sick and always prioritizing the least of these over the powerful. I didn't 'fall out in church' as they say, but there was a very strong awakening in me of the importance of these issues in my life. I didn't want to walk alone on this journey. Accepting Jesus Christ in my life has been a powerful guide for my conduct and my values and my ideals.