Welcome to Quadrant Online | Login/ Register Cart (0) $0 View Cart
Menu
December 09th 2008 print

Bill Muehlenberg

He is a Killer, But…

The US election is now history, but there is still plenty of discussion about the election of Barack Hussein Obama.

The US election is now history, but there is still plenty of discussion about the election of Barack Hussein Obama. His supporters and detractors are still slugging it out. Indeed, in my discussions with others I find a constant – and quite disturbing – theme heard time and time again.

When I tell people why Obama was not my choice and they ask me why, I begin by saying, “Well, he will be our most pro-abortion President thus far…” But before I am allowed to finish, these folk blurt out, “Yes, but…” They then go on to make a whole lot of excuses as to why the abortion issue is not really such a big deal, and that other issues are just as important, if not more important.

When I try to point out that not all issues are morally equal, and try to get them to think about what they are actually saying, they often will quickly throw up their hands and say, “Oh, I don’t want to talk about it anymore.” They certainly don’t want to talk about it. But the truth is, they really don’t want to think about it. They are quite happy to justify their voting for this hyper abortion proponent, yet not even think about the moral and social ramifications of it.

Obama and abortion

Lest people question whether Obama is in fact ferociously pro-abortion, let me offer a few details here. Obama has been consistently pro-death. For example, he has opposed banning partial-birth abortions and he has opposed an Illinois bill recognizing the human rights of babies who have been ‘born alive’ after failed abortions.

He supported legislation that would repeal the Hyde Amendment, which protects pro-life citizens from having to pay for abortions that are not necessary to save the life of the mother and are not the result of rape or incest. He also promised that ”the first thing I’d do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act”. FOCA will create a federally guaranteed ”fundamental right” to abortion through all nine months of pregnancy. The pro-abortion National Organization for Women has proudly noted that FOCA will “sweep away hundreds of anti-abortion laws [and] policies”.

Obama also voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in Illinois, which sought to protect babies born alive after ‘botched” abortions. He said at the time, “I would have voted for the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in Illinois had it been worded the same as the federal bill. I think that’s the position the Democrats should take.” There is one minor problem here: Obama had prevented his committee from adding the federal wording to the State legislation.

While Obama opposed Born Alive in committee, he in fact voted “present” – neither “yes” nor “no,” but merely “present” – on the state Senate floor. During the primaries campaign Hillary Clinton said this was one of many “present” votes that Obama made, indicating that Obama lacked leadership skills.

Obama also opposed the ban on partial-birth abortions when he served in the Illinois legislature, something which even many ”pro-choice” legislators would not do.  And he condemned the Supreme Court decision that upheld legislation banning these late-term abortions.

Obama told Planned Parenthood, America’s largest abortion provider, this on July 17, 2007: “We know that a woman’s right to make a decision about how many children to have and when – without government interference – is one of the most fundamental freedoms we have in this country.” I would have thought that the most fundamental human right is the right to be alive.

He also said this in his speech: "I have worked on these issues for decades now. I put Roe at the center of my lesson plan on reproductive freedom when I taught constitutional law – not simply as a case about privacy but as part of the broader struggle for women’s equality. Steve and Pam will tell you that we fought together in the Illinois state Senate against restrictive choice legislation – laws just like the federal [partial-birth] abortion ban that are cropping up. I’ve stood up for the freedom of choice in the United States Senate and I stand by my votes against the confirmation of Judge Roberts and Samuel Alito.”

And since his November election win Obama has wasted no time in naming pro-abortionists to work with him. For example, within 24 hours of being elected, he offered the White House chief of staff position to Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, who has a 100 percent pro-death voting record.

Kathleen Gilbert on LifeSiteNews (on Nov. 25) offered a list of other “Obama appointments so far who have a track record of opposing the pro-life movement and actively promoting the anti-life cause”:

“-Commerce Secretary: Bill Richardson – The governor of New Mexico calls himself a ‘Catholic’ and says he is personally opposed to abortion; yet the Democrat has worked against true marriage and pushes so vehemently for unrestricted ‘reproductive rights’ he was named a ‘Champion of Choice’ by NARAL in January of 2007. 
-Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS): Tom Daschle – Daschle gained notoriety for his consistently pro-abortion voting record in his years as Democratic Senate majority leader.  Daschle blocked votes on five major pro-life bills that passed the U.S. House, and in 2002 wrote a letter to his constituents asking for donations to NARAL.
-(One bioethicist who will likely join the ranks of the new HHS committee, along with Daschle, is Dr. R. Alta Charo, an avid supporter of embryonic stem-cell research who has called pro-life bioethicists leaders of ‘the endarkenment.’)
-Secretary of Homeland Security: Janet Napolitano – The Arizona governor is a well-known abortion supporter who vetoed a partial birth abortion ban, and in 2005 earned praise from NARAL for forcing Arizona pharmacies to distribute the morning-after pill despite moral objections.
-Communications Director: Ellen Moran – Moran is the current executive director of EMILY’s List, a major political action committee dedicated to helping elect solidly pro-abortion Democratic women to political office. She supports tax-payer funded abortions, and opposes any bans on partial birth abortion.”

And don’t forget Obama’s new Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton, who of course has been a long-standing pro-abortion crusader.

Also of major concern is the fact that Obama will be able to appoint pro-death Supreme Court judges who will remain in power long after he leaves. The decisions of a few Supreme Court judges will determine the direction of the life-issues in America for many decades to come.

Yes, but…

So when I point out to my friends these facts, I still hear from many these words: “Yes, but…” They respond with remarks such as: “Yes, but these are not the only issues that are important.” “Yes, but he is working for unity and harmony.” “Yes, but, he is good on social justice issues, etc.”

My friends who make these claims – and there are many of them – really seem to think that the killing of unborn babies is just one of a number of social issues – no better or no worse than say, tax cuts or social security reform.

But can I suggest that this is not just another social issue. It seems to me it is a fundamental and absolutely crucial issue, which we cannot take lightly. We can go easy on such issues as road infrastructure or changes to trade policy. But we cannot go easy on such a basic human rights issue as the right to life.

But since so many folk do not seem to get this very crucial distinction, let me try using an analogy – albeit an imperfect one – to help illustrate my point.

Suppose two Germans in the 1930’s were debating the recent election of Adolf Hitler. One says, “How in the world could you have voted for this guy? He is intent on murdering whole classes of people, simply because he does not consider them to be human beings.”

But the other guy limply responds, “Yes, but there are other issues. We can’t just focus on that one narrow issue. Think of all the important social justice issues he is running on. He will be restoring law and order. He will bring unity and cohesion. He will make Germany once again a strong and proud nation. So don’t just pick on this one little issue.”

Hopefully most people would see – at least now, with hindsight – that such a response is just not acceptable. The Holocaust may have been just one issue among many for Hitler, but it was an enormously significant issue. All other issues fade in comparison.

I would think that a similar situation exists here. Obama wants to do all he can to promote abortion as a fundamental woman’s right. Of course that means he wants to deny every individual the fundamental right of simply being alive. He in effect wants to wipe out a whole class of people because he does not consider them to be human beings. Sound familiar?

It seems all the promises of Obama – whether bringing the troops home, fixing the economy, or restoring harmony and justice to Americans – means absolutely zippo to those whose innocent lives are snuffed out before they even get to enter the world.

Sorry, but I just do not buy this “Yes, but…” baloney. It is a copout and a sign that moral and intellectual vigour is not always a high point of many people. If we cannot even get this most fundamental and basic of moral and conceptual truths right, then we are a very messed up people indeed.