Wow. So much I could talk about, but I’ll stick to one issue today … maybe I’ll tackle the others later.
Everyone is probably aware of the issue surrounding Obama’s honorary degree and speech at Notre Dame. Did anyone see the photo of Obama being “christened” at the ceremony? It was very creepy.
Well, Notre Dame is a Catholic university and therefore stands strongly against abortion. They decided to give him the degree anyway, and their reasons are their own. I’m not sure why it matters to them either way, but they did it.
What I want to address is Obama’s speech. First of all, while he began, something else very eerie happened. Three times a protester shouted “Stop killing children!” during the beginning of his speech. To drown out the protesters, the rest of the crowd started chanting “Yes we can!” in support of Obama.
“Yes we can”? Yes we can … what? Kill babies? Again, just creepy to me.
Then Obama gets into the abortion issue and tackles it head on. Well, I suppose he should be commended for not ignoring it, for having the courage to express his beliefs about it before what could be a hostile crowd.
And I will agree with Obama in the sense that he encouraged a sensible debate on the issue of abortion. I don’t believe he really wants it, but I will agree with the statement. Obama’s concern was that people not denigrate and demonize people on diferent sides. Which is great. I agree that people, especially liberals, should stop doing these things.
But my major issue was when Obama made the statement that people of faith cannot know what God thinks about abortion, and in such a state of doubt, should leave it to people’s conscience about the decision, which he admits is a tough moral and spiritual decision.
What kind of people of faith is he talking about? Faith does not lead to doubt but to confidence. I guess my definition of faith is quite different than his own. People of faith are able, more than anyone else, to know what God thinks about abortion. And let me be clear. He hates it. Passionately.
Not to mention … does Obama feel this way about other things that are illegal? Stealing, rape, child molestation? Of course not. How about torturing terrorits? Is he, as a self-proclaimed “person of faith”, able to decide when it is okay to torture another human being? He thinks he is and is prepared to force his views on large groups of people who fundamentally disagree with him … and on other issues as well, like health care and the structuring of our financial institutions.
The hypocrisy is astounding, really.
One particular abortion procedure reaches in and sucks out the baby’s brain. Another cuts it up into little pieces and pulls the pieces out. Sometimes the baby survives the abortion and they just let it sit in the corner to suffocate alone.
A person of faith cannot say this is wrong? I absolutely believe that we can. And must.
We can talk about the details of waterboarding and call the Bush administration criminal for perpetrating it. But it was all done through legal channels. It was technically “legal” if not morally justifiable at the time. Are we not able to discuss the details of abortion? Well, we don’t for a reason. The “conscience” of our country would react quite clearly.
So the real danger is in being brainwashed into the mindset that abortion isn’t an issue to discuss, in detail, with others that you work with or people in your family or on the news. Don’t be brainwashed that there are other, more important issues, so we don’t have time to discuss killing babies right now.
One last statement by Obama that I feel needs to be addressed. He says that abortion should be “legal but rare.” I won’t get into the philosophical copout that this is (what if I said child molestation should be “legal but rare”? … what would you think of that statement? or my character?), but instead just say that this is either complete ignorance or a bold-faced lie.
I’ll give an example. What if I said that I believe we can’t really do anything about gang violence in the inner cities. We have so much more to tackle first. What those gang members do is their conscience and is a difficult moral and spiritual decision for them. But then I say I believe it should be rare, implying that I don’t like it. Then what would you say if I then funded a program giving all those gang members Uzis and building battleground parks where they could shoot each other to their little heart’s content, all on the government dime. Would you believe that I think gang violence should be rare?
So either it is a lie, or Obama is so ignorant of truth and common sense that we should seriously consider whether Joe Biden is a better man for the job. You make your choice.
Either way, as you can tell, I’ll keep talking about the truth and the horror and the shame of what we are allowing to happen in our own nation.
Peace.
So as someone who completely agrees with you, I have a question. Before I ask it, I’ll give a brief description of how I answer it. Any criticism is welcome.
Every objection that I’ve ever heard about abortion (What about rape, etc.) all completely miss the fact that you are murdering innocent life. There’s no way around it. Rape is horrible, and it certainly is emotionally trying to then discover that the victim is pregnant…but does killing the innocent child right any wrong whatsoever?
Or even if we leave the realm of morality (sort of) for the sake of “pure science”…
If you did nothing to intervene, this clump of tissue, or “fetus” would eventually be born as another human being. If, in the second that it leaves a woman’s body, you were to put a gun to the child’s head and shoot it, you would most likely be charged with first degree murder…and people would be rightly outraged. So how many seconds, or minutes do you go back in the process before you can say that it’s no longer murder?
Point being, almost every “legitimate” smoke screen…*ahem* I mean, argument that is PRO abortion is usually just a piss poor attempt to talk about how a woman shouldn’t have to be responsible for the fact that she has life inside of her.
At the same time, there is a part of me that knows that the act of arguing issues like these are usually not what changes people.
In fact, one of the fundamental issues with these arguments is a completely deficient understanding of love.
So, there is a responsibility to demonstrate love to these people after you have proclaimed the truth in boldness.
I know that (at least for me) it’s very tempting to grasp hold of a truth and then loose sight of love in the way that I proclaim that truth.
So then, the question is exactly that.
How do you avoid being self righteous, while proclaiming a desparately needed truth to blind people?