http://www.comcast.net/ar....Question/

Asked on Sunday whether the "above my pay grade" answer was too flip, Obama said: "Probably. ...What I intended to say is that, as a Christian, I have a lot of humility about understanding when does the soul enter into ... It's a pretty tough question.

The Great Showbama demonstrating his magical ability to dodge the question and white-wash over the issue.

"And so, all I meant to communicate was that I don't presume to be able to answer these kinds of theological questions

Barack Obama, expert on other "Non-Theological Questions":

While serving in the Illinois Senate, Obama received a 100 percent rating from the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council for his support of abortion rights. Since his election to the United States Senate Obama has maintained a 100 percent rating from Planned Parenthood (as of 2007) and NARAL (as of 2005).

http://en.wikipedia.org/w...traception

So in sum, on the issue of abortion, Barack Obama can't answer when he thinks life begins but is a proud member of the NARAL "100% Cluster Of Cells Club".

[This message has been edited by Kyle L. Varnell (edited 9/8/2008).]

Barack Obama:

It's above my pay grade.
http://www.youtube.com/wa...Z7DVFDOMzc

Same question, different answer:

John McCain:

Life begins at conception.
http://www.youtube.com/wa...zJdSlQYd0Q

I wonder what his NARAL score is?

Sen. John McCain's Record on Choice
http://www.naral.org/elec...ccain.html

Voting Record:
Sen. McCain has an anti-choice record. He received the following scores on NARAL Pro-Choice America's Congressional Record on Choice.

2007: 0 percent
2006: 0 percent
2005: 0 percent
2004: 0 percent
2003: 0 percent
2002: 0 percent
2001: Because only one choice-related vote was taken in 2001 - to confirm John Ashcroft as United States Attorney General - no numerical score was given for the year. Sen. McCain voted anti-choice.

Seems McCain can answer "Theological Questions".

[This message has been edited by Kyle L. Varnell (edited 9/8/2008).]

^
|


[This message has been edited by J. Dyba (edited 9/8/2008).]

Kyle - you've said yourself that you are not a Christian and have no background in Christian theology - so why should we listen to you critique Obama's answers regarding his Christian background and theology?

Major Pain probably disagrees with Obama on probably every single point raised by Mr. Warren - but at least he can discuss and argue against those points intelligently and with authority, instead of "neener neener neener, Showbama bad, blah blah blah"

Leave it to a wingnut like Kyle to gravitate to the old polarizing issue of abortion, and ignore the real issues of the 2008 election that people care about.

Just tired, worn out, rhetoric. Why don't you start a thread about gun rights?

Gunner you're missing the important sh*t like who's baby is it and who's ex-pastor hates America. These appear to be the issues in this election.

Only God can truly answer that question. Hmmm...McCain must have been told by God. Wow....

Kacey, Gunnar, J. & others:

I invite you to take a few moments, follow the link below (the link is to the Trinity United Church of Christ - the church Mr. Obama attends), read the 'About Us' page, and spend some extra time taking the embeded link "the Black Value System", and read that enlightening article.

http://www.trinitychicago...&Itemid=27

I'll patiently wait for your interpretations.

Bridgier you're correct, I don't profess to being a Christian (although I was baptized as such) nor an expert on Christian Theology. That said however I do believe that a life begins the moment of conception and should be protected as such. I don't think you need to be a Christian to ascribe to such views. The point of the posts was that if McCain can answer the question with without hesitation why then does Barack have trouble doing the same?

Leave it to a wingnut like Kyle to gravitate to the old polarizing issue of abortion, and ignore the real issues of the 2008 election that people care about.

Gunnar, judging by how excited people are over Sarah Palin being the VP nominee I'd say that abortion is very much a real issue to a good majority of voters.

Also in regards to your other post Gunnar, I don't think Obama is a radical pirate of Islam. Sorry but John Stockton just made an uncharacteristic turnover

[This message has been edited by Kyle L. Varnell (edited 9/8/2008).]

"He also said at one point that he wouldn't support a repeal of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion, arguing that such a repeal might compel women to seek dangerous and illegal operations. He soon backed away from that stance, though."

I guess McCain didn't always feel so prolife.I don't know that this could be construed as a total flip-flop,maybe more a sideways slide job.Personally,I don't think flip-floppin' is so bad.Sometimes times and issues change and people have to change along with them.Unfortunately,some folks will never change their mind,even if it's proven that they are 100% in the wrong[like Bush]
I don't know why people even throw the abortion issue out on forums like this.Most folk's minds are already made up one way or the other,and I really doubt there's anything that's going to be posted here that's gonna change anyone's view.

Kyle -

Of course life continues at conception - both the egg and the sperm are "alive", so it's not as though anything miraculous is occurring there - the question you're eliding is "does this new arrangement of dna possess a soul?" - which is a much stickier question. Of course, if you're just trying to bellow out sound bites from 50,000 feet overhead, then I suppose it IS an easy yes or no question. But if the magic ensoulment mechanism kicks in the instant two gametes fuse, then what about non-fraternal twins? What happens to all those souls that get flushed out during menses after failing to implant? Miscarriages, etc? Is there a special heaven for non-sentient lump souls? Etc, etc.

I'm still trying to figure out when the soul entered my motorcycle...

Seriously, Sen. Obama's response to the question of "When Life Begins" doesn't differ all that radically from the Jesuits under which I studied in college.

Actually, its a good thing KyleRick brought this up because I think we also need to discuss what choices are being discussed.

Should the pill be banned? The pill not only prevents a woman from ovulating, but provides a hostile ovarian environment preventing the implantion of the zygote if the woman should accidentally ovulate. The zygote, with the full genetic complement to become a human, is essentially aborted.

Should IUDs be banned? They also prevent implantation.

Using the criteria of a zygote becoming "human" with all associated rights at conception, these two methods and probably many others should be banned.

What about cases of rape and incest? Should a woman in that position have any choice?

How about a woman pregnant with a child inflicted with a severe birth defect? Should the woman have a choice in this case? I admire Sarah Palin for making the choice to keep her child with Down's Syndrome, but she did indeed have a choice. If left to her, I believe she'll do her best to prevent anyone from having that choice. She'll make a lot of "choices" i regards to birth control for all women.

I'd also like to know if it is a bigger sin to have sex with or without a condom. In a perfect world, abstinence-only education sounds great. Yes, indeed, if you don't have sex, you won't get pregnant or pick up an STD. But lets get real, people. Humans are human.

This is a good topic for discussion and I must say that I'm glad I brought it up.

Seriously though Bob I'll try and address your questions one at a time.

Should the pill be banned?

I think that if you believe that life begins at conception then yes "The Pill" and other forms of contraception should be banned. The only method of proven birth control is abstinence however in today's "No Consequence" society that's not a very realistic option. So then we have a problem - What do you do now? That being the case the pill and a condom I feel are the next best thing. My problem with calling it a "Thing" or a "Zygote" etc is that once you start referring to the baby in those terms it then becomes a little easier to suck it out of the birth canal.

What about cases of rape and incest? Should a woman in that position have any choice?

This is where it gets a little trickier. Should a woman in this position have any choice? I would argue yes that a woman should have a choice in this case but what about the baby itself? Should this newly formed child not have a shot at life because of some sick person's crime or a family member's error in judgement?

How about a woman pregnant with a child inflicted with a severe birth defect?

Absolutely not. This is where one of my problems with abortion comes into play. This isn't a new car or a new house etc you're buying. It's a human baby. What I mean is that suppose the woman in question aborts the child with birth defects and has another child that also has birth defects. Should she just be allowed to take mulligan after mulligan until she gets the child she wants?

I will agree (as I think everyone would) that abstinence is the best, most proven method of birth control, but again in this day and age that's not going to be very realistic. I think the compromise then lies in A: the pill and B: a condom.

Another problem that I have with abortion, aside from the act itself, is that many view it as the be-all, end-all, primary & sole method of birth control. What I mean is that there are women and men out there that simply think with their loins instead of their heads. They think they can sex around all they want and if they get pregnant, no big deal, we'll just flush it out and go back fooling around.

Aside from taking a life, that's my biggest problem with abortion.

[This message has been edited by Kyle L. Varnell (edited 9/9/2008).]

" is that many view it as the be-all, end-all, primary & sole method of birth control."

Have any statistics to support that? It's relatively expensive, time-consuming and requires out-patient surgery to accomplish - just how large a percentage is "many"?

I think that if you believe that life begins at conception then yes "The Pill" and other forms of contraception should be banned.

Huh? Does your dictionary list something different than mine for "conception"?

You might want to read Bob's post again. He's arguing that forms of contraception, such as the pill or IUD, that have a post-conception means of preventing pregnancy would likely be banned as well.

There are some conservatives who would like to return us not to a pre Roe v. Wade world, but a pre Griswald v. Connecticut world as well.

Reading the post again isn't helping , but I'm guessing my problem is lack of knowledge on the details of various birth control options.

As far as using abortion as a primary form of birth control goes, I recently saw an excerpt from "Freaknomics" that said that when abortion was legalized in the 70's the rate of conception increased by 30% but the birth rate decreased by 6%, so you could certainly infer from that that people are less careful about avoiding pregnancy when abortion is easily available.

I recently saw an excerpt from "Freaknomics" that said that when abortion was legalized in the 70's the rate of conception increased by 30% but the birth rate decreased by 6%, so you could certainly infer from that that people are less careful about avoiding pregnancy when abortion is easily available.

Another possibility is that before abortion was legalized a whole lot of conceptions/illegal abortions went unreported.

Undoubtedly there were some, although I'm sure it would be far fewer than legal ones. Kinda hard to come up with any numbers on that though.

I'm hoping, but not holding my breath, that when the pres/VP debates occur, we'll get everyone's real opinions on Roe v Wade, choice, birth control, etc. The last time I heard McCain talk, he was purely pro-life (I read that anti-choice). This morning on Good Morning America(or one of those shows) I saw one of McCain's daughters saying in effect that if or when she was 14 and became pregnant due to rape, he would leave the decision to her whether or not to terminate the pregnancy. She was lovely and well spoken, by the way. If I heard it correctly, I'd say his campaign is trying to have it both ways - trying not to scare off pro-choice people while trying to appease the "pro-life" crowd.