Obama is leading the polls. He is a smooth politician. He is a likable guy. I saw his speech last night (and part of McCain's) at the Alfred E. Smith Foundation Dinner. Both he and McCain gave light-hearted speeches at the event. But when it comes to giving details about his real views on controversial subjects like abortion, Obama hides, twists, and distorts his real views. His stonewalling efforts to block the Born Alive Infant Protection Acts when he was an Illinois State Senator make him the most pro-abortion politician in the United States of America. It was amazing that the issue was kept out of the presidential debates until the third of three (a big thank you to debate moderator, Bob Schieffer of CBS, for including at least one question about this issue). I am aware of a growing number of intelligent, young, Christ-professing supporters of Obama. I have struggled to understand why some of them are walking the streets for Obama. I think I understand now--they have a different litmus test for this election. Mine is the abortion issue. Theirs is pacifism. If a commitment to pacifism is the sunnum bonum, then by all means Obama is the better choice of the two. I am puzzled, however, at just what it is that makes some pacifists so militant about their pacifism. As I write that last phrase, I have a specific militant pacifist in mind, who argues incessantly (so much so that one of my esteemed colleagues has entered the "dome of silence" on any political issue), that anybody that would or could possibly support Obama's rival in this election is a "nutjob".
Granted, there are some nutjobs out there--on both sides of this election! Not everyone taking the abortion issue as the litmus test for this election is a nutjob. Obama distorted his position on the issue when it came up in the third debate. Here is a reasoned analysis, by National Right to Life. A reasonable person should give it a read.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment