WORLD Magazine Library powered by Amazon
Term Life Insurance at Savings up to 75%!
Logos Bible Software for Bible Study
Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Talking abortion, finally
Bob Schieffer asks the question on a subject many undecided conservative voters want to hear about: abortion.
Their paraphrased responses:
John McCain: I want states to decide the abortion issue, not Roe v. Wade. I will not cease to protect the rights of the unborn.
Barack Obama: It’s a moral issue, that a woman should decide with her family and religious advisers. I support Roe v. Wade. I’m supportive of a ban on late-term abortion, with the exception of mother’s health and life.
Topic: Campaign 2008, WorldMagBlog
Keywords: barack-obama, John-McCain
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
back to top92 Comments to “Talking abortion, finally”
McCain ridiculed the health of the mother as a reason to permit abortion.
Report comment as offensive
We could finally see the major difference between the two with this question. I think McCain did a good job of parsing Obama’s words a few times, like in this response, pointing out the vagueness of the “health of the mother” condition.
Along the same lines, when Schieffer asked if either would have a litmus test for SCOTUS appointments, McCain’ was the clearer answer. He escpecially gained a few points by mentioning why he voted for the liberal appointees while Obama voted against the conservative ones: qualification vs ideology.
Report comment as offensive
No Scroopy,
What McCain ridiculed was how the health of the mother meme has been expanded to include any reason they want. That’s why they use mental health as justification. They think if they say it will effect her mental health, that it falls under health of the mother. McCain clearly answered this question better than Obama. But hey, at least he didn’t use that “above my paygrade” nonsense.
Report comment as offensive
I did not see Scroop’s #1 post before posting, so I will say to him: McCain was not ridiculing the health issue, only pointing out how it has been misused by abortion proponents to allow almost any reason as a health reason. Just how few mothers are actually at risk in a pregnancy now-a-days? Usually a C-section delivery takes away the risk of a natural delivery killing the mother.
Report comment as offensive
It was obvious that, although the moderator followed up McCain’s answer with a direct question of whether or not McCain would nominate someone to the SCOTUS who disagreed with him on the abortion issue, the moderator did NOT do the same after Obama’s answer (even though Obama did NOT answer the question directly).
Report comment as offensive
It’s anti-life, no choice for the unborn, just a trip to your local anti-infant death doctor -
This is what Obama said not ALL that long ago:
Report comment as offensive
Roe v. Wade says a woman has a right to an abortion at any time to preserve both life and health. McCain clearly talked like he wants to eliminate the “exception” for health. Independent women voters won’t think that’s acceptable.
Report comment as offensive
Thanks for setting the record straight with an actual quote from Barry, Victoria. All the leftists can do, meanwhile, is write things like “McCain clearly talked like he wants to . . . ” (without actually quoting him) to describe what their opposition said. The difference speaks a lot.
Report comment as offensive
Moth
There are women who are so selfish, nothing will stand in their way to eleminate their child from the womb so they can ‘CARRY ON’ whatever their little lives desire - without giving one single tooting hoot, as to the other life they helped to create, but destroyed because it just didn’t fit into their cramped selfish schedule. Who needs a mother like that, but then there are thousands of mothers and dads who would welcome that little one with all the joy of NEW YEARS EVE -
But the anti-infant death doctor awaits his patient, the mother without any love for her child.
Report comment as offensive
That’s funny Scroopy,
I know probably 8 women off the top of my head who are independents, and only 2 are pro-abortion. They mostly perfer the pill, IUD’s, diaphrams, condoms, foam, and spermicidle jells, and other means of contraception to abortion. Only 2, 1 of which is a close relative, think abortion is acceptable, except in the case of rape. I think you’re full of it.
Report comment as offensive
Punished with a baby doesn’t mean punished by a baby — or that a baby is a punishment — but that he doesn’t want the girl and her baby to be punished by circumstances. Victoria’s outrage is an example of political correctness run amok.
Report comment as offensive
The outrage is over our government sanctioning the killing of innocent pre-born babies, Scroop.
Report comment as offensive
Outkast
When I heard the debate, all the ugly things that were said regarding abortion, all trumpted up to look very eloquent, but closely examined, filled with verbalism - all you see is a sinful world which accepts anything that serves their selfish purpose -
Report comment as offensive
Scroop- You are spinning like a top on that one. What Obama meant is what he said- that a baby would be punishment to his daughters. If he meant it the way you interpret it, then why didn’t he say it that way?
Report comment as offensive
Moth
Here it is:
“But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”
If you can’t get it, then its your desire not to.
Report comment as offensive
AJ I think you’re full of it
Not being an independent woman, perhaps I am. We’ll know soon enough, and if they vote for McCain, I’ll acknowledge your diagnosis of my condition.
Report comment as offensive
As an independent woman voter, I find John McCain’s anti-abortion stance refreshing. Rights for women include unborn ones.
Report comment as offensive
Welcome to the debate, Hantheroo, and thanks for sharing your perspective.
Report comment as offensive
Peter — he didn’t say it that way because it takes more words and he didn’t think his audience would twist a mundane ellipsis into the theological judgment that babies are a curse.
Report comment as offensive
How often does “health of the mother” actually enter in?
It’s a number that the prolife advocates should admit is so vanishingly miniscule that it should be effectively disregarded for the sake of saving the vast majority of lives. It’s also a number the prochoice advocates should admit is so vanishingly small that it doesn’t enter equation if they’re really about reducing the number of abortions.
Who’s going to step up and beyond their own purist pride?
Beuller? Bueller? Anyone?
Report comment as offensive
Emily, how could those undecided voters be conservative if they are still undecided at this point? One may argue over how conservative McCain is, but Obama is obviously far less so.
Report comment as offensive
So, instead of saying But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby,, why didn’t he add three words (in bold): punished with the circumstances of a baby?
Report comment as offensive
The live CNN “EKG” poll was interesting on this one. Obama just about pegged the meter with women, while McCain’s reading wandered about. And when Obama linked choice rights with other rights, like speech, even the men responded positively.
Report comment as offensive
And CNN’s focus group (not “women in general,” but the women they picked to be in their audience) was indicative of U.S. voters? Keep believing that, Arcadia . . . .
Report comment as offensive
Peter — are you like me an aficionado of the psychological theories of Freud? You clearly want Obama to have said what you think he said, but that would almost be too good for you to be true, so you probably are thinking that Obama’s words slipped out by accident, revealing what he truly thought. The subconscious never lies, never says no. If that’s your point, Herr DoKtor, there’s no arguing with you about it.
Report comment as offensive
DAD
Why is this so complicated and so vague - maybe a ploy for the liberals, but I think abortion is murder, the killing of a defenseless, helpless, God-formed little human being!
Abortion is still murder, no matter what “politically correct,” rhetorical stance you put to it. and the Bible speaks against it, Psalm 139:13-16, and Jeremiah 1:5 among some places. I wish someone in any debates and/or rallies would say those three words, to set the records straight!!
Report comment as offensive
What ever one’s opinion on abortion, it would seem that this did not stick in this debate as a campaign issue which was going to swing the election.
Anti-abortion forces are, it would seem, basically talking to themselves during this campaign.
Report comment as offensive
DAD post 26,
actually abortion is clearly not murder at least in a civil sense: it is consider justified under certain conditions.
Now if you are going to take this position, what is your basis for calling abortion unjustified?
Report comment as offensive
And so are Pro-Abortion forces, Musing. Tell us something we don’t already know . . .
Zzzzzz . . . . .
Report comment as offensive
So why are the pro-infant death specialists out in full force?
Report comment as offensive
30: Because they love to implant themselves on a prolife blog. Funny thing is, they’re wasting their time, when they should be on blogs filled with undecided, sway-able voters.
Shhhhh . . . . let them stay . . .
Report comment as offensive
outkast post 24,
and your scientifically constructed poll of women which shows that women in general would prefer to outlaw abortion?
The staistics show that perhaps somthing like 50% of people support abortion wiht reasonable controls, with perhaps only 16% or so arguing for completely outlawing abortion (these were Matt Y’s numbers if I remember correctly).
Under these conditions, I absolutely encourage all social conservatvies to insist that McCain make anti-abortion as the key topic for the next two and a half weeks of the campaign.
The Democratic party will thank you.
Report comment as offensive
outkast post 29,
actually it appears that the majority of the population is talking about the economy. It appears that it is the topic which is of most import to the electorate.
Report comment as offensive
Musing: Blah, blah, blah . . .
Report comment as offensive
outkast,
so do you think that McCain established a strong new trajectory to drive his campaign for the remainder of the election?
And if so, what is this new trajectory?
Report comment as offensive
Musing: See my post #34.
Report comment as offensive
I see that outkast seems to have a problem with his tongue.
I hope it gets better soon outkast.
So do others think that McCain established a new trajectory which can drive his campaign for the remainder of the election?
If so what was it?
Report comment as offensive
Musing Maybe you should drop McCain a note and tell him how you ‘really feel’-
Do you and your husband talk about this, or do you just blither about it on the blog? - My husband and I discuss the issues at length.
Report comment as offensive
Methinks Musing and her husband and still ticked that “Bush stole the 2000 election,” and then proceeded to whip Kerry in 2004, and still has a larger percentage of support than the Democrat-controlled Congress in 2008.
Report comment as offensive
MUSING: Anti-abortion forces are, it would seem, basically talking to themselves during this campaign.
Absolutely. McCain scored points with the base when he disparaged concerns for the health of a mother in abortion, but to the electorate, that sounded sadistic. McCain scored points with this blog when he characterized Obama as an abortionist “extremist” but independent voters could see that Obama was merely defending the language of the court and the law of the land.
Report comment as offensive
Scroop: How can you say Obama is NOT an “abortionist extremist” when he has the highest rankings from NARAL and even promoted a law allowing the killing of just-born infants in his home-state of Illinois?!!!!
Report comment as offensive
Victoria: My husband and I discuss the issues at length
BOLDLY, I bet. (poor fella)
Report comment as offensive
General thoughts: If McCain were truly as pro-life as he likes to say he is, then he would lobby for a constitutional amendment banning abortion. Instead, he just says he wants to overturn Roe and send it back to the states. That’s a good first step, but overturning Roe is just that: a first step.
Real AJ #3: Obama has gone on record saying he’s fine with states banning late term abortions with an exception for health. He further defined health to not include emotional or psychological health. If that truly is his belief, then he actually supports more limits on abortion than exist now.
Musing #32: Nationally, the numbers are approximately 55% supporting “legal in all cases” or “legal in most cases” and 45% supporting “illegal in all cases” or “illegal in most cases”, with 5% unsure.
Outkast #41: Obama scores a 100% from NARAL and a 0% from NRTL. But so do John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and lots of other Democrats. In order to be an “extremist” Obama would need to be at the very fringe of those in the pro-choice camp, unless you define extremist differently. Just going by the numbers, he really isn’t.
Report comment as offensive
buddyglass post 43,
I agree wiht your first group of 55% which is of course a majority. Matt y’s numbers were slightly lower, but we are talking polling data with an error band.
Your 45% number is more interesting since it appears to be approximately:
16% in favor of outlawing all abortions
and therefore
29% or so in favor of abortion in a variety of cases including the life and health of a mother. Usually this category also includes incest and rape.
As such, it would seem that you agree with the basic numbers but differ in interpretation on the illegal category.
So do tha anti-abortion forces on this blog want abortion illegal in all cases or would they tolerate abortion being legal in some cases, where ife and health of the mother and typically incest and rape would appear to be some of the cases.
And the sense of the blog?
Report comment as offensive
outkast post 39,
since in November of 2007, outkast was forced to apologize for comments he made which disparaged my wife, it would seem that outkast should know that I am a male.
But as we are seeing, outkast seems to be a bit out of touch with reality.
Report comment as offensive
victoria post 38,
the issues surrounding the election are the primary topic of discussion in our house right now, and have been for just under one year.
If anything my wife is more concerned about McCain’s anti-abortion stand than I am.
And in yours? How are you viewing the election in your house?
Report comment as offensive
Musing #44: I personally fall into the “always illegal” category, but I grouped “always illegal” and “almost always illegal” together since they both describe people who want more restrictions than currently exist today.
Report comment as offensive
Buddyglass post 47,
but if yo are going for always illegal, then this is a false alliance. I can equally group almost always illegal, the legal in most cases, and the legal in all cases together to show an overwhleming majority favors abortion.
The reality is that we are very unlikely to get an always illegal.
But if the always illegal group want to participate in what I suspect is a coming cmpromise, they will have to become less intransigent. If they do not, then given their small minority position, they will become moot.
I suggest we are seeing some aspects of this in the present election.
Report comment as offensive
abortion is M U R D E R in all cases…..
Musing, as usual……….you are wrong.
Report comment as offensive
“Punished with a baby doesn’t mean punished by a baby — or that a baby is a punishment — but that he doesn’t want the girl and her baby to be punished by circumstances.”
Now does that quote run around the block a few times saying punishment isn’t punishment unless it’s punishment, or what?
Obama used the word “punishment.” And stop trying to say he didn’t mean what he said.
You either have the child or you don’t. Obama is saying having the child is punishment, so get rid of it. So don’t say that a baby in those circumstances isn’t punishment in Obama’s view. It is. It’s what he said.
If anyone is out of touch with reality, it’s you. You’re the one redefining words.
Report comment as offensive
And now they’re going to pull in their “data” and percentages and all their “evidence,” and never deal with the truth that a child is losing it’s life to suit their political expediency. It’s incredible, and it goes on day after day.
They won’t tell you when life begins, and they won’t tell you why you should be willing to kill a child for expedience — because they KNOW it’s murder. They are cowardly and will not answer the questions, because they know your response, so they try to “soften” their position by telling you the percentage of people who would collude in the murder.
It’s okay if we murder the baby. All the people in our group are willing. It’s like putting a bunch of Ted Bundy’s in a room and asking them if serial murder is okay. Of course, it’s okay to them! What a sad thing to have no morals, no guts, and live your life by polls, of all things!
Report comment as offensive
Theophuilus post 49,
murder is unwarrented killing.
You have not deonstrated that abortion is unwarrented under certain conditions.
You haven’t even deonstrated that it is killing of a human being.
And in your sense that demonstrating this is not necessary, you are demonstrating the assumptional gap which makes this discussion difficult to hold with the strong anti-abortion proponents.
And as Buddygrass and Matt Y have noted, the strong anti-abortion position is held by hperhaps 16% of the population.
Since this group appears to be intransigent and is relatively small, a compromise on this issue will probably be developed without them
Report comment as offensive
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States
The numbers (from October 2007, the most recent poll listed in Wikipedia) showed 54% of respondents agreeing that abortion should at least be banned in all circustances except in cases of rape and incest and to save the mother’s life. Smaller portions of this group went further, with 4% saying it should be permitted “never” and 16% saying “only to save the woman’s life” (also my position).
So if we accept those numbers, then John McCain and George W. Bush, who oppose abortion except in cases of rape and incest and a threat to the mother’s life, are in the majority. They are generally considered “pro-life”, and they use pro-life language when speaking of abortion, so it can be argued that a slim majority is pro-life according to this poll. Abortions in cases of rape and incest account for only about 1% of all abortions, so this is hardly significant enough to argue that this position is not basically pro-life or that it is closer to the pro-choice view.
Report comment as offensive
NJLawyer post 51,
but if by child you mean human being, then we have already established that under the law a fetus is not a human being and hence not a child.
We again see the unwillingness to accept that there are assumptional differences here which must be nogotiated if we are to reach a compromise.
And if the strong anti-abortion proponents are unwilling to compormise then, since they are only 16% or so of the population, a compromise will be developd without them
Report comment as offensive
Matt Y post 59,
indeed I am using your data.
But how many argue that abortion shold be totally illegal?
When I saw your numbers it was aboutr 16%.
so if you are arguing that we will be very restricitve on abortion BUT abortion will be legal and available, your model is right.
If we are arguing that there will be no abortion, and there have been comments in WMB about not allowing abortion for say rape, then you anti-abortion community is about 16%.
I have tried to be very careful about making this distinction here.
It would seem you are cherry picking your numbers.
Report comment as offensive
Wikipedia mentions other polls showing a virtual tie between “pro-lifers” and “pro-choicers.” One poll showed 50% pro-life and 45% pro-choice; another showed 49% pro-choice and 47% pro-life.
Report comment as offensive
Musing #55: Yes I know what you’re saying.
so if you are arguing that we will be very restricitve on abortion BUT abortion will be legal and available, your model is right.
Yes, what I’m saying is that 54% favored being at least that restrictive (very restrictive) on abortion, and that people in that 54% call themselves pro-life. Although they have some minor differences among themselves, they are generally allied together against those who call themselves “pro-choice.”
I am not dogmatic, however, that there is a “pro-life majority” since other polls indicate a virtual tie between pro-lifers and pro-choicers.
Report comment as offensive
I am also not in favor of using polls to decide what is right or what our policy should be. But I AM interested in the public opinion on abortion.
Report comment as offensive
Matt Y post 53,
now looing at your numbers I am struck by the following.
I see as I reread your material that the completely illegal abortion commmunity is about 20% (I missed the 4% add on).
Now it is interesting that 23% of the respondents after the debate suggested that the Ayers allegation was very iportant to them.
The siilarity in numbers would open the possiblity for an hypothesis that those who are fully against abortion are also focused on Ayers.
The posts in WMB certainly do not refute this.