Thursday, May 21, 2009

Obama schmoozes at ND

Obama schmoozes his pro-life prey is a good review of Obama at Notre Dame. They note:

Obama said we must “honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion.” Just days after inauguration, he removed conscience clause protections for health care providers, potentially forcing abortion participation or job termination.

“Remember that each of us, endowed with the dignity possessed by all children of God, has the grace to recognize ourselves in one another to understand that we all seek…the same fulfillment of a life well lived,” he said.

Huh... if we are "endowed with the dignity possessed by all children of God" the surely this biological fact is relevent:
By 17 weeks this life form can urinate, grasp objects, experience pain, dream and suck its thumb. Its heart already pumps 25 quarts of blood a day. By week-20, when partial birth abortions are first performed (a procedure Obama voted twice to protect), our “young one” recognizes its mother’s voice.

While Obama has been praised for his sometimes soaring Teleprompter-speech rhetoric,
Obama's rhetoric is in the service of a base form of political sophistry. The Genius of Barack Obama is that he is a leftist who talks the talk of a moderate. Consequently, when his opponents screech that he is a baby-killing proabort socialist, while he talks about 'fair-minded opponents', they look like crazies and he looks like a bridge-builder.

Yet he is anything but that. He speaks of common ground, gets the kudos for it, but then engages in actions that on abortion as on a wide range of issues are extreme, dangerous, intemperate, and radical. And wrong. As with a magician, if you want to pay attention to what's really happening, ignore the mouth and pay attention to the hands.

See also this comment:

The power structure of Notre Dame clearly assisted President Obama in his strategy of deception: saying one thing and doing another.

In his Notre Dame speech, Obama endorsed "sensible conscience clauses"--- yet his HHS has abandoned their enforcement of the conscience clauses already passed by Congress (the Church Amendments, Coats Amendment, and the Hyde/Weldon Amendment). Isn't it "sensible" to enforce the conscience measures our elected representatives have approved over the past 35 years? What's wrong here?

In his Notre Dame speech, Obama said we must respect others' convictions, whether they are for or against abortion: yet he will compel pro-life citizens to become accomplices to abortion, by requiring to to finance, through our tax dollars, the very thing we find morally intolerable.

We respect Obama, and he kills babies. He respects us, and he makes us pay for it. What's wrong here?

Again in his Notre Dame speech, Obama said opponents of embryonic stem cell research may be upholding the sacredness of life, "but so are the parents of a child with juvenile diabetes who are convinced that their son's or daughter's hardships can be relieved."

He didn't mention that adult stem cells have shown repeated success, in laboratory trials involving animals, at reversing diabetes, and have even produced functioning, insulin-producing islet cells in humans, while embryonic stem cells have shown no such success.

And at Notre Dame, he gets one of the world's most prestigious Catholic podiums to broadcast his self-serving, factually deficient arguments, and nobody can even challenge him on this. This is "dialog"? This is "exposure to challenging ideas"?

What's wrong here?

No comments: