Obama is a liberal and a Christian. I'm a conservative and Christian and more specifically, a social conservative. He's a democrat and I'm a republican. But I supported his primary run and I intend to vote for him in November.Nonetheless, I find myself at odds with Obama on social issues such as abortion, and I am troubled with my decision to support him given his position and voting record on the issue. LaShawn Barber jumped right on that particular sore spot today.
"Barack Hussein Obama is an “articulate” infanticide-supporting liberal who doesn’t like being called a liberal....Anyone who believes it’s OK for “doctors” to crush the heads of infants in the birth canal isn’t getting my vote. If you’re black and pro-life but feel “torn” between racial pride about his nomination and disgust for his pro-death stance, shame on you. Get your priorities straight"
She scored a direct hit on my misgivings about Obama and once again I'm wrestling full bore with the decision to support him in November. In the primary, it was one thing. In the general, its another. So I wanted to get some clarity about his stance. Abortion is a shameful and violent act against innocent children. Partial birth abortion is an extreme version of the abortion practice that even the pro-choice repudiate when they understand the procedure, especially variations such as dilation and evacuation.
Obama's website says he will make protecting women's rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as president. On The Issues reports his background on the subject as follows (read from bottom of list, makes more sense):
- Ok for state to restrict late-term partial birth abortion. (Apr 2008)
- We can find common ground between pro-choice and pro-life. (Apr 2008)
- Undecided on whether life begins at conception. (Apr 2008)
- Teach teens about abstinence and also about contraception. (Apr 2008)
- GovWatch: Obama's "present" votes were a requested strategy. (Feb 2008)
- Expand access to contraception; reduce unintended pregnancy. (Feb 2008)
- Rated 100% by NARAL on pro-choice votes in 2005, 2006 & 2007. (Jan 2008)
- Voted against banning partial birth abortion. (Oct 2007)
- Stem cells hold promise to cure 70 major diseases. (Aug 2007)
- Trust women to make own decisions on partial-birth abortion. (Apr 2007)
- Extend presumption of good faith to abortion protesters. (Oct 2006)
- Constitution is a living document; no strict constructionism. (Oct 2006)
- Pass the Stem Cell Research Bill. (Jun 2004)
- Protect a woman's right to choose. (May 2004)
- Supports Roe v. Wade. (Jul 1998)
- Voted NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP. (Mar 2008)
- Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion. (Mar 2008)
- Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
- Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006)
- Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
- Sponsored bill providing contraceptives for low-income women. (May 2006)
- Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance. (Dec 2006)
- Ensure access to and funding for contraception. (Feb 2007)
- As President, Obama will have no unilateral power to impose his very liberal views. While SCOTUS selections will be in his domain, those selections must be approved by Congress and the people will have a say and I look to activism with Congress as the check and balance on the potential liberal excesses of an Obama administration.
- John McCain for all that he is a conservative, is a republican tied to Bush and the republican party's approaches on the economy, on the war, and on expansion and entrenchment of executive power. I believe a departure from that direction is necessary. Obama will be more willingly accountable to the American people than our current President, and moreso than John McCain.
- Obama is a Christian, can understand the Scriptural basis for opposition to abortion, is predisposed and sensitized to the issue and is therefore reachable and teachable on this subject. I believe it is possible to bring Obama closer to us on this issue, certainly moreso than it will be to steer republicans from the path they are taking the country in on the war, the economy and the scope of executive and corporate power.
Teach teens about abstinence and also about contraception
We've actually made progress over the last several years in reducing teen pregnancies, for example. And what I have consistently talked about is to take a comprehensive approach where we focus on abstinence, where we are teaching the sacredness of sexuality to our children.But we also recognize the importance of good medical care for women, that we're also recognizing the importance of age-appropriate education to reduce risks. I do believe that contraception has to be part of that education process.
And if we do those things, then I think that we can reduce abortions and I think we should make sure that adoption is an option for people out there. If we put all of those things in place, then I think we will take some of the edge off the debate.
We're not going to completely resolve it. At some point, there may just be an irreconcilable difference. And those who are opposed to abortion, I think, should continue to be able to lawfully object and try to change the laws.
Undecided on whether life begins at conception
Q: Do you personally believe that life begins at conception?A: This is something that I have not come to a firm resolution on. I think it's very hard to know what that means, when life begins. Is it when a cell separates? Is it when the soul stirs? So I don't presume to know the answer to that question. What I know is that there is something extraordinarily powerful about potential life and that that has a moral weight to it that we take into consideration when we're having these debates.
We can find common ground between pro-choice and pro-life
Q: The terms pro-choice and pro-life, do they encapsulate that reality in our 21st Century setting and can we find common ground? A: I absolutely think we can find common ground. And it requires a couple of things. It requires us to acknowledge that..
- There is a moral dimension to abortion, which I think that all too often those of us who are pro-choice have not talked about or tried to tamp down. I think that's a mistake because I think all of us understand that it is a wrenching choice for anybody to think about.
- People of good will can exist on both sides. That nobody wishes to be placed in a circumstance where they are even confronted with the choice of abortion. How we determine what's right at that moment, I think, people of good will can differ.
Ok for state to restrict late-term partial birth abortion
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.
I drew some comfort from the fact that apparently LaShawn finds herself conflicted as well:
"I can’t not vote. So, on Tuesday, November 4, 2008, I will head to my polling place. What I’ll do after that, I do not know."
Can a pro-life position and a vote for Obama be reconciled? Am I wrong to believe that Obama's Christian understanding means his position can be moved in the direction of the pro-life camp? Is activism with Congress a reliable, adequate venue and mechanism to blunt an Obama administration's liberal tendencies on social issues?
Arron:
ReplyDeleteYou make the statement:
[quote]republican tied to Bush and the republican party's approaches on the economy, on the war, and on expansion and entrenchment of executive power. I believe a departure from that direction is necessary.[/quote]
I find it refreshing that you would make such a linkage because I do the very same thing with Obama per his membership in the machine that currently dominates nearly every single large city in America and 100% of majority Black districts in America. As for me, a Black man, I am puzzled as to how Obama supporters can disconnect what is seen on the streets of their community from the elected leadership, community activism and the POLICIES that prevail which shape these outcomes.
If there was ever a need for CHANGE it would be with respect to the policies surrounding economics, public safety, education and lifestyle choices WITHIN THE BLACK COMMUNITY.
You speak of "entrenchment of executive power"? Did you note the recent antics of the Democratic administration of Washington DC? They set up a roadblock around a high crime community and interrogate every person seeking to enter. If they don't have good cause to go in - they are turned back by the police. This policy has gone unchallenged by the usual liberal suspects who are defenders of civil liberties.
I am all for accountability for failure Aaron. It seems to me, however that the biggest evidence of this not being the case in America - it is WITHIN THE BLACK COMMUNITY. Failure of a Republican means dismissal in exchange for a Democrat. Failure of a Democrat means a battle in the Democratic Primary. If that person wins still - he is a shoe-in for reelection because the Democratic Primary within the Black community is the general election. All the person needs to do is to shift the blame for the failure upon the larger community (ie: the federal government) and get the people to focus on the external fight and a unified march up to the next plateau rather than focusing in on the leaders already at hand and have them to MANAGE the plateau that they already control.
Brother, you get no objection from me when it comes to the issue of accountability within the black community. I'm constantly dismayed at the underperformance of black organizations, institutions and black political leadership. And I call it into account. Browse through some of the posts here and you'll see thats the case from corrupt congressman Jefferson, to the thug mayor Kilpatrick, to the NAACP.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, republican leadership has been in power for the last eight years and we are in a sorry state. A new direction is necesessary. I agree with Obama only on about 20% of his positions. He has some solution sets which are boneheaded. But Obama's liberal agenda can be managed. He's not a messiah and his relative neophyte status as a politician on the national level means his effectiveness in implementing his agenda will be limited, particularly on the big issues and especially if the dems are held to slim majorities. The current republican agenda cannot be managed, in part because this president has actively thwarted accountability and I do not expect McCain to do better in this regard.
Aaron:
ReplyDeleteI am not talking about Jefferson, Kikpatrick and the NAACP for the concept of corruption.
I am challenging you and the Black community to make a dispassionate evaluation between the policies that are popularly in place in our communities and if they align with our common goals. I have listened to these goals and have crafted the following list of what we can all agree are "the best interests of Black people" and then I appended two more:
* Academic Attainment to allow our students to obtain the skills to be in service to the community
* Safe Streets that allow our communities to build a social fabric amongst its members
* Economic Growth to create a strong local economy
* Healthy lifestyles that allow our people to enjoy a long life as free from chronic diseases.
And two more added by me to cement the 4 above
* Implement all of the above elements as EFFICIENTLY as possible with methods that are as COMPREHENSIVE as possible, benefiting the maximum amount of people
* Put a priority on ORGANIC means where as having the community developing the skills and processes to accomplish things on their own makes them most self-sufficient and best positioned to take these skills and transplant them to another land and replicate them.
*************
Step back and take note of these principles which I operate off of and project as a template upon all who I analyze.
For me my analysis is not just about Obama. I must analyze the entire political machine that dominates the Black community at the local level. This machine has a monopoly majority upon the political districts where we live. Where as a legislative body needs 60% to do whatever it pleases with this veto proof majority - this party has upwards of 90% of dominant support yet they attempt to shift the blame for our schools, our crime, our lack of employability upon some outside force who's "harm" from the past 200 years has creeped into the psyche of a child born in 1990 who is a high school senior this year as well.
My vote against Obama is a vote of no confidence in the political machine of which he comes from regarding their strategy for our community. Nearly 40 years ago the strategy articulated by civil rights leader Bayard Ruskin was to have the Black community, 1)obtain control of our community, 2) by getting our people elected, 3) to offices over the political districts in which we live, 4) as Democrats 5)SO THAT BENEFITS WILL FLOW WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY.
Clearly the first 4 steps which relied the most on the Black community doing what we have been doing have been successfully executed. Let me be clear - despite the lack of the waving flag of a finish line - the Black political activism done under the auspices of this mandate has been successful on the front end.
My argument is that the promised results have FAILED to be delivered for the benefit of the community. we are conditioned to have a battle for the ages against White supremacy and racism. This same strategy does little for us once defacto segregation results from the choices of all people in our society choose to live around the people they feel most comfortable. This includes the anti-gentrification battles which maintain the Black texture of certain under-capitalized communities but then complain about high concentrations of poverty as being proof of racism in America.
For me it is not "Barack Obama". The problem is with what this same farm team of political operatives have made Barack Obama out to be while never being held accountable for the deeds which they have already brought to bear within our community. They want our community to remain "united" at the polls as we climb with them up to the next plateau but are loathed to have the Black community inspect the conditions in the current plateau that we stand upon to determine their competence in managing this land.
Thus I make a distinction between the Black community's interests and the political activism that we cleave to as a means of obtaining many of the goals listed above.
The Black political operative is not going to police itself. The community needs to focus on its objectives and then manage those who promise to lead us toward these benefits. We currently fixate on methodology/ideology more than results. We are doing everything necessary to remain as we are. The more false hope that is absent logistical details to get to the other side of the valley - the greater the chances we will remain.
What happens (or doesn't happen) in a a doctor's office is between the patient and the doctor. It is a personal and very private matter. How I see it, it is an individual rights matter. And supposedly the GOP is the party of perseving individual rights. Yes, everyone has a right to voice how they feel about this matter, but no one, especially the government or groups of people compelling law makers, has the right to tell someone how they should live and care for themselves.
ReplyDeleteI hate the idea of late term abortions. But I don't believe in fetal rights. Until the fetus is born - natural or cesaeran - it is neither separate or individual from the mother, its life host. Treating the fetus as supreme or separate from the mother, its host, is inappropriate. Suddenly, anything a pregnant woman does is subject to public scrutiny.
Like you a politicians stand on abortion rights is important to me. I seriously looked at McCain, but the moment I discovered he is pro-life, I pulled back. This is an important issue to me.
DN lee.
ReplyDeleteyou say that nobody has the right to tell someone how they should live. Well what about letting one person decide if ANOTHER PERSON to live?
not to turn this into an abortion debate (although you kind of did), but people always talk about the "choice" of the woman, but few people mention thta the "choice" of the child is being taken away. ever come at it from that perspective?
@Constructive Feedback
ReplyDeleteSorry to take so long to get back, I've been attending a funeral.
I think that you and I are very much on the same page, and where we are parting company is in supporting Obama. Your position seems to be that supporting him means supporting the political structures and systems that spawned him and which have failed to produce policy resulting in material gain from black folk. Its a reasonable position, but I don't approach it quite that way. I'm all for accountability. I reject the political approach that has been taken by the black establishment all these years, as I think you do. My approach is that we ought to have accountability with these political leaders. Those who are not moving towards better policy, better outcomes, they should be replaced. We ought to invest in different solution sets such as the things you pointed out.
While Obama is arguably a product of a flawed political system in the black community, I view him as a beneficial evolution in terms of leadership and effectiveness. So I think he's earned support in that regard. Further, Obama is not the messiah and accountability should rule the day. On MANY policy issues, I have differences with Obama. But I think where his policy ideas go wrong can be managed and he can be held accountable, unlike the current administration, which takes extensive affirmative action to avoid accountability (Exhibit A, Gitmo).
But I think you and I share agreement that the whole of the black political establishment needs to have accountability applied to it. The rise of Obama is actually I think beneficial in this regard, because it is shaking up orthodoxies in black politics that have needed shaking for a long time.
@DN Lee
ReplyDeleteThanks for dropping your thoughts here at the Season. We absolutely love divergent viewpoints here, so I'm happy to have your voice in conversation.
Clearly where the pro and anti abortion camps part company is this very issue of what respect the baby's life is due while it remains in the womb.
You hate late term abortions and I'm sure thats true because you recognize the inhumanity of whats being done. In order to rationalize whats being done though, you distance yourself from it by essentially dehumanizing the child. Terming it a fetus rather than a baby and the woman a host rather than a mother is how you do that with your language. It demonstrates why the reasoning employed to support abortion and particularly partial birth/late term abortion is in my view wrong. You said "Until the fetus is born - natural or cesaeran - it is neither separate or individual from the mother, its life host. "
Your standard here is completely arbitrary and expedient in that it only exists to justify the abortion. The partial birth abortion is a case in point, where the baby is PARTIALLY delivered, then killed. In order to justify that action, all you have to do is manipulate the definition of being born. In a partial, the doctor puts the baby into a breach position, pulls it part way out, then pierces the skull and sucks out the brain. Under your standard, thats okay because the baby was not "born". Its a totally arbitrary standard.
You frame the issue as one of granting rights to life for the baby necessarily means taking away or limiting the rights of self determination for the mother when those rights come in conflict, as they do in an abortion decision.
Its true that the exercise of a woman's right to self determination gets limited in a world where abortion is not permitted. However, we accept a variety of limitations on our rights in accordance with principles and standards. Further, I would argue that a woman's right to control her own body is not severely impacted at all by making abortion unavailable, because leaving aside those situations where a woman involuntarily becomes pregnant (rape,incest and so on), women have nearly complete control over whether or not they become pregnant, based on their own decision making.
Adrian raises the issue that the unborn child's choices are being taken away and if you are being fair, you have to admit that she is correct in this. The reality is that the pro abortion view takes the position that the baby is not human unless its out of the womb, no matter how far along it is in its development and therefore the baby can be killed at any time. Once out of the womb, a pro abortion viewpoint can no longer make the argument that its not human and therefore can be killed.
Furthermore, this debate is also fundamentally about power and powerlessness. The unborn child is powerless to prevent or stop its murder. We can make such decisions because the unborn have no ability to prevent it, in contrast to a child out of the womb, which is granted enforceable rights by society. Although the child can't itself enforce those rights on its own, society will enforce its rights on its behalf.