Why I'm Pro-life and Pro-Obama by Frank Schaeffer

[Coexist]

For a look into some of the soul-searching happening right now, please read the entire blog, not just the snips I have placed below. It is thought-provoking.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/why-im-prolife-and-pro_b_85636.html

<snip>
Fast forward...

In 2000, we elected a president who claimed he believed God created the earth and who, as president, put car manufacturers and oil company's interests ahead of caring for that creation. We elected a pro-life Republican Congress that did nothing to actually care for pregnant women and babies. And they took their sincere evangelical followers for granted, and played them for suckers.

<snip>
Fast forward...

Today when I listen to Obama speak (and to his remarkable wife, Michelle) what I hear is a world view that actually nurtures life. Obama is trying to lead this country to a place where the intrinsic worth of each individual is celebrated. A leader who believes in hope, the future, trying to save our planet and providing a just and good life for everyone is someone who is actually pro-life.

<snip>
The society that Obama is calling us to sacrifice for is a place wherein life would be valued not just talked about. As he said in his speech delivered on February 6 in New Orleans, "Too often, we lose our sense of common destiny; that understanding that we are all tied together; that when a woman has less than nothing in this country, that makes us all poorer." Obama was talking about the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, but his words also apply to our overall view of ourselves.

<snip>
Similarly the Republicans have also been hypocrites while talking big, for instance about their pro-life ethic. But what have they achieved? First, through their puritanical war on sex education they've hindered our country from actually preventing unwanted pregnancy. Second, through the Republican Party's marriage to the greediest and most polluting earth-destroying corporations they've created a climate (both moral and physical) that has scorched the earth for-profit, with no regard to future generations whatsoever. The Republicans are to the pro-life movement what the Clintons are to selfless public service.

[IndianaJones]

1. its some comfort to know that he is open to the possibility that he may be wrong on choice. nt.

[NC_Nurse]

2. Wow. A REAL pro-life person.

Whyo wants to PREVENT unwanted pregnancies and nurture the ALREADY BORN.

Whodathunkit? :thumbsup:

[IndianaJones]

3. and drawn to Obama....nt.

[NC_Nurse]

9. Well, of course. They must value honesty.

[K Gardner]

4. Schaeffer is a wonderful writer and journalist of impeccable credentials. His post is very

well-written and moving, thanks for posting !

[Iris]

5. So before we were a consumer society, women didn't have abortions?

"What we need in America is a spiritual rebirth, a turning away from the false value of consumerism and utilitarianism that have trumped every aspect of human life. To implement this vision we need leaders that inspire but to do so they have to be what they say they are. It's not about policy it's about character."


er... yeah, right.


While I can respect someone who is pro-life who also sees the importance of a social safety net for families as well as decent sex education, I have a real problem with the idea that a "spiritual rebirth" will create a place where no woman would ever have to have an abortion. It's just not realistic.

[Coexist]

6. I don't agree with the man on everything, but I think this speaks to the Clintony years

during the time of economic growth, the abortion rate was lowered. Many believe that when people have economic security, they are more likely to choose to bring a child into this world.

I am staunchly pro-choice. I just found it refreshing that the pro-life crowd is thinking past the womb in terms of life now.

[Iris]

7. yes, I see what you are saying.

And I have said more than once that I can respect someone who is pro-life but is also pro-family and medical leave, pro-sex education, etc.

However, I really get the shivers when I hear people start acting like we can create a society where abortions are not necessary. It really muddies the waters, in my opinion, because women have abortions for all sorts of reasons besides economic problems. And I really, really think childbearing should not become political. I see disturbing trends - blog discussions where people practically endorse forced c-sections because they think they are "safer" for the baby when in fact babies born by c-section are more likely to die than those born vaginally. (Also, did you know that when some people say "natural childbirth" they actually mean a vaginal delivery?) I just think the fact that everyone thinks they need to have an opinion on this topic just makes things more dangerous for women of childbearing age as a whole.

[Coexist]

8. lol! on the "natural childbirth" thing

I had three large babies the natural way - and I don't think someone who had a vaginal, epidural delivery had quite the same experience.

Not that I care if someone chooses medication- I just didn't. But yes - that amuses me, c-sections are so common that anything other is 'natural'.

[Iris]

10. It is funny

until you start thinking that people this misinformed might be in a position to make actual decisions about your healthcare. Here in GA we are on our way to having a "Respect human life ammendment" (so everyone in the state will get a chance to vote on this) which would make every fertilized egg equal to every person - never mind the fact that the AMA defines conception as the time of implantation.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

11. Here in CO it's looking like we'll get the same "life starts at conception" amendment on the ballot.

When millions of children go hungry in the country, they get all fluffed up about a fertilized ovum. :eyes:

[Coexist]

12. maybe you should dig up the old argument

"the building is burning, you have time to save just one - two dozen frozen embryos, or one 2 month old baby - and why would you make that choice."

[Iris]

17. I'll store that for future reference!

Seriously, I am thinking of writing a letter to the editor in response to a legislatures touchy-feely essay about how this is a peaceful ammendment, not meant to be weapon against pro-choice folks. I want to ask him what they will do with all the extra embryos formed at fertility clinics. Will they be drafting women ages 18-25 to provide a place for them to fully develop?

[stillcool]

16. Wouldn't it be nice...

if young women were educated about their bodies, and contraceptives? Wouldn't it be nice if those contraceptives were ready available to all women? I often wonder how that would affect the need for abortions. I also wonder how that would effect the astronomical rate of children in foster care. I also wonder how that would effect the astronomical growth of our prison population.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/statistics/entryexit2005.htm
Foster Care in the Year 2020 (if nothing changes in child welfare trends)
Children who will experience the foster care system Over 9,000,00014
Children who will age out of the foster care system 300,00015
Foster youth aging out of the system that will experience homelessness 75,00016
Foster youth aging out of the system that graduate from college 9,00017
Number of children killed by abuse or neglect 22,50018
http://www.casey.org/NR/rdonlyres/89F2787D-AA68-45D5-B5CC-557B20BB426F/1226/fcFACTS1007.pdf

http://www.yesican.org/stats.html
Finding of the NIS-3:

* The estimated number of children seriously injured by all forms of maltreatment quadrupled between 1986 and 1993, from 141,700 to 565,000 (a 299% increase).
* Considering the Harm Standard:
* The estimated number of sexually abused children increased 83%;
* The number of physically neglected children rose 102%;
* There was a 333 % increase in the estimated number of emotionally neglected children; and
* The estimated number of physically abused children rose 42%.
Girls are sexually abused three times more often than boys.

Boys are at a greater risk of serious injury and of emotional neglect than are girls.

The incidence of fatally injured girls declined slightly, while the incidence of fatally injured boys rose.

Found no race differences in maltreatment incidence.

Poverty is significantly related to incidence rates in nearly every category of maltreatment. Compared to children whose families earned $30,000 or more, children in families with annual incomes below $15,000 were:

* More than 22 times more likely to experience maltreatment under the Harm Standard and 25 times more likely under the Endangerment Standard.
* More than 44 times more likely to be neglected, by either definitional standard.
* Over 22 times more likely to be seriously injured using either definitional standard.
* 60 times more likely to die from maltreatment under the Harm Standard.

How many children are abused and neglected in the United States?
http://pediatrics.about.com/od/childabuse/a/05_abuse_stats.htm?terms=statistics+on+child+abuse
Each week, child protective services (CPS) agencies throughout the United States receive more than 50,000 reports of suspected child abuse or neglect. In 2002, 2.6 million reports concerning the welfare of approximately 4.5 million children were made.

In approximately two-thirds (67 percent) of these cases, the information provided in the report was sufficient to prompt an assessment or investigation. As a result of these investigations, approximately 896,000 children were found to have been victims of abuse or neglect—an average of more than 2,450 children per day.

More than half (60 percent) of victims experienced neglect, meaning a caretaker failed to provide for the child's basic needs. Fewer victims experienced physical abuse (nearly 20 percent) or sexual abuse (10 percent), though these cases are typically more likely to be publicized. The smallest number (7 percent) were found to be victims of emotional abuse, which includes criticizing, rejecting, or refusing to nurture a child.

An average of nearly four children die every day as a result of child abuse or neglect (1,400 in 2002).

[Iris]

18. of course it would be nice. But "young" women are only getting about half of all abortions.

n/t

[stillcool]

21. Oh..excuse me...I should have said...

"all women"...My mother died of cancer when I was a year old. She was told while she was pregnant with me that her pregnancy would 'hasten her death'. When it came to the decision to terminate her pregnancy her choice was no choice at all, and it had everything to do with social pressures and nothing to do with available contraception. I have no idea what her choice would have been if she lived in today's world, but I suspect, or perhaps hope it would have been different, or at least a more thoughtful decision regarding the consequences. However her experience is not comparable to unwanted pregnancies to which there is an easy remedy.

[hulklogan]

13. I do not want to be spiritually reborn

I'm still loving my original birth. Thanks mom!

[ProgressIn2008]

14. "It's not about policy it's about character." No, it's not about personalities

it's about good economic policies, good judicial appointments, and defense of choice in a strong categorical way.

I don't like these buzzword slogans. "It's about character." "It's about spiritual rebirth." WTF does that mean?

[Iris]

20. buzzword slogans

yep! That's exactly what frigthens me when people start talking about reproductive rights. If I have a baby at this stage in my life (40s), I really, really, really don't want my medical decisions to be based on phrases like "spiritual rebirth." And I KNOW my husband doesn't want to be the single father of an infant because of some lawmakers ideas of how we should all be spirtually reborn.

[krabigirl]

15. I agree with you.

And we don't need a spiritual rebirth. We need a rebirth of logic and reason. A new age of enlightenment.

[Iris]

19. exactly.

And if someone still wants to make choices based on emotion and fuzzy logic, that's their choice, but don't laws that make me make my own decisions that way.