« Weekend Caption Contest™ Winners | Main | The Warrior Legacy Foundation »

No, Mr. President

Yesterday, President Obama said in his commencement speech at Notre Dame that abortion is an issue over which we should just agree to disagree. This is a view that I and many others like me who see abortion as an abomination and a moral outrage can not accept. I can not just agree to disagree on the termination of a million innocent and defenseless human beings a year.

John Piper can't agree to disagree, either, and he is responding to President Obama on his view of abortion. This was produced around the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, but it's particularly timely today, one day after Obama's Notre Dame speech:

Hat tip: Hot Air.

Now, does my view on abortion mean that I don't think there is any room in the Republican party for those who are ardent believers in low taxes, limited government, less regulation, and a strong military but who are pro-choice?


What it means is that when it comes to abortion, I will never stop trying to change their minds.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (43)

I agree. Pro life people ar... (Below threshold)

I agree. Pro life people aren't trying to vie for political one upsmanship but to save babies lives. Talk about torture. I would like our extreme lefties explain how they are fine with doctors and women torturing and killing babies every day. How do they reconcile that? ww

Agreed and well put Kim. It... (Below threshold)

Agreed and well put Kim. Its like trying to pound nails into granite skulls, but I will never compromise on this issue.

Here's Obama's plea for "op... (Below threshold)

Here's Obama's plea for "open minds, and understanding":


HT brothersjuddblog.com

Ooo another Malkin hat tip.... (Below threshold)

Ooo another Malkin hat tip. At this point, could you let us know what stories are not Malkin based?

What it means is that when it comes to abortion, I will never stop trying to change their minds.

You are someone who loves kittens, but not cats. Surely you have better things to do? Maybe you could use that crazy right wing passion to heavily promote contraception, morning after pills or adoption programs? I promise you it will be more effective. I recommend directing your energy to something that will actually work.

Everyone has the right to t... (Below threshold)

Everyone has the right to their own opinion. Which is what pro-choice is. Not necessarily pro-abortion.

The story with Obama was potentially overblown in terms of how many protestors there actually were. Students say that many more people were actually for Obama speaking than against.

"Surely You have better thi... (Below threshold)

"Surely You have better things to do..


"I recommend directing Your energy to something that will actually work."

Like what? Banning You ignorant ass? That would be much more productive. Stick Your reccomends where the sun dont shine.

Dumbest and most revealing... (Below threshold)

Dumbest and most revealing thing I've ever heard came from a "Pro Choice" idiot defending third trimester abortions. "But they don't think like 'real' people".

Slate has an interesting ar... (Below threshold)

Slate has an interesting article regarding Obama's attitude with certain issues. This type of thinking probably is not just reserved for the economy.
Notes Toward a Theory of Obama

"He's ruthless. In a recent interview with the New York Times, Obama described his economic policy as "ruthless pragmatism." Interesting choice of modifiers. Obama has a healthy disdain for the overrated virtue of political loyalty. Around the nomination process, this has been slightly chilling to watch. If you're useful, you can hang around with him. If you start to look like a liability, enjoy your time with the wolves. Before the inauguration, Christopher Hitchens described Obama as feline in his demeanor. The president is catlike also in his lack of evident affection for the people who take care of him. His cracks at the White House Correspondents' Dinner about Hillary Clinton being an envious loser, Larry Summers' woman problem, and training his dog not to pee on Tim Geithner skirted cruelty. Obama's jokes about himself were about how great everyone thinks he is."

His smug remarks toward his collegues suggest several notes from the Rahm Emmanuel playbook of conscience, where officials publicly show their disdain for each other. He wants us to "disagree agreably", but only as long as he is called the winner of the discussion. This, of course, has nothing to do with the good of the Nation, but has everything to do with controlling a generation.

Exchange the word 'slavery'... (Below threshold)

Exchange the word 'slavery' for 'abortion' and ask the 'Won' if those who opposed and supported slavery should have simply 'agee to disagree', or to 'find common ground'. To those in the pro-life movement, this is literally a matter of life and death.

Most know that Roe vs Wade cannot be overturned easily, but at least we know that things like requiring parental notification and banning of partial birth abortion are not unreasonable positions to make.

"But they don't think like ... (Below threshold)

"But they don't think like 'real' people".

Exactly, but they move and feel like real people, and just happen to contain a blueprint of the two parents combined. And of course they couldn't possibly possess a soul like "real people".

oops, *agreeably... (Below threshold)

oops, *agreeably

Most know that Roe... (Below threshold)
Most know that Roe vs Wade cannot be overturned easily, but at least we know that things like requiring parental notification and banning of partial birth abortion are not unreasonable positions to make.

In agreement here. And as someone who favors a woman's right to choose, I am willing to make concessions so we can actually get our government (and some citizens) to focus on what I consider to be vastly more important issues. Comparing it to slavery is dead wrong, however.

Comparisons to slavery are ... (Below threshold)

Comparisons to slavery are right on the mark.

We dehumanized blacks to enslave them, for our convenience. We dehumanize the youngest humans to slay them, for our convenience. Pets, farm animals and slaves had more rights than the unborn.

Oh yeah and we now know that babies in the womb feel pain. Why aren't liberals against the torture of babies in the womb? They get upset when we waterboard 3 terrorist masterminds, even when it prevents the slaughter of thousands. But the torture killing of hundreds of thousands of babies, that's a "right". No it isn't, it's a terrible wrong.

If an unborn child could be... (Below threshold)

If an unborn child could be counted as a vote, or at least as a whole person during the Census, then the Left would be fighting to end abortion.

"Everyone has the right to ... (Below threshold)

"Everyone has the right to their own opinion. Which is what pro-choice is. Not necessarily pro-abortion."

Then why the vitriol and hatred when someone's "choice" is for life?

Because of guilt Dave..... (Below threshold)

Because of guilt Dave..

Am I the only person in the... (Below threshold)

Am I the only person in the world who thinks abortion is not a government issue? It's an issue between a patient and a doctor.

Dave, I think it is a commu... (Below threshold)

Dave, I think it is a community and State issue. You can never forget there is a lot of money made in abortion. Follow the money. Besides the doctor gets his or her license to practice in the state. So, the regulation should come from the State. ww

Am I the only person in the... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

Am I the only person in the world who thinks contract murder is not a government issue? It's an issue between a person who wants another killed and an assassin.

/sarc off

"Everyone has the right to ... (Below threshold)

"Everyone has the right to their own opinion. Which is what pro-choice is. Not necessarily pro-abortion."

Dave, the term pro-choice is only used regarding abortion, unless you can show examples of it being used elsewhere. As far as I can see, the intensity by which pro-choice is supported has everything to do with life and death. Pro-choice is still technically a misnomer, because the unborn child has no say in the matter and not considered a living human being.

Kim,Great video, v... (Below threshold)


Great video, very powerful! The problem is the government wants to indoctrinate our hearts and minds with what is morally and ethically right. Thank God for our conscience! Unfortunately for some, they silence it for so long they forget what's right and wrong.

This is a view tha... (Below threshold)
James H:
This is a view that I and many others like me who see abortion as an abomination and a moral outrage can not accept. I can not just agree to disagree on the termination of a million innocent and defenseless human beings a year.

But are you willing to come down off your moral high horse to work with the other side on efforts that can reduce abortions overall?

I, Zelsdorf Ragshaft III, h... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

I, Zelsdorf Ragshaft III, have a simple solution to this debate. Those of you who firmly believe abortion is a good thing, and a right should submit themselves immediately to be post natally aborted. It would end the debate and would put their money where their mouths are.

"Everyone has the right to ... (Below threshold)
retired military:

"Everyone has the right to their own opinion. Which is what pro-choice is. Not necessarily pro-abortion."

Prochoice = proabortion. prochoice by definition means that you think abortion should be a choice which means that you support infanticide.

You can put lipstick on it but it is still a pig.

Conservatives, every year m... (Below threshold)

Conservatives, every year millions of women undergo abortions, often without even knowing about it. They're called spontaneous abortions. Look at it this way, your god is aborting these pregnancies, thereby making YOUR GOD THE BIGGEST ABORTIONIST OF THEM ALL!

To try to prevent spontaneous abortion what would you have sexually-active, fertile women do -- tape their vaginas shut after sexual intercourse? I don't think that's going to work too well, do you?

And if you don't have any problem with spontaneous abortions, why do you get bent out of shape by induced abortions, where a little extra help (e.g., a pill -- RU486) is needed to discharge the fertilized egg, embryo, fetus, whatever?

"thereby making YOUR GOD TH... (Below threshold)


That is akin to "The beatles are bigger than JESUS CHRIST."

Sucks to be You

Herman, Your broad b... (Below threshold)

Your broad brushing usage of conservative
is, I guess, your way of asking how big of
a shovel can you get here at Wizbang.
And your comment is way off base. Capice?

To say that we should just ... (Below threshold)

To say that we should just agree to disagree in a friendly matter about the dismemberment of babies is like telling people to amicably disagree about exterminating the Jews. This is a coward's way out, and is extremely manipulative. He knows he is losing the debate nationwide. He cannot justify abortion.
So let's just make nice. AND that means: Prolifers: shut up and put up. He is preying upon their religious niceness of the Catholics at Notre Dame.

Babies at 11 weeks in utero feel the pain of an abortion. This has been proven in England.
In utero, they feel pain even more so because of the development of their nervous systems.

Why do you think that pictures of aborted babies bother people so much? Because they know the truth. Deep in their hearts, they know.

When women who are being counseled see the developmental stage of their babies, they are amazed at how far along their babies are. Even women that have had babies.

Look at it this wa... (Below threshold)
Look at it this way, your god is aborting these pregnancies, thereby making YOUR GOD THE BIGGEST ABORTIONIST OF THEM ALL!

I can't even begin to tell you what it wrong with the above quote, but if you want to get into details, malnutrition and drug use are also common causes for spontaneous abortion.

Herman, the discussion is about pro-life vs. pro-choice, not what is out of the woman's control during pregnancy.

"Choice" does not begin ... (Below threshold)

"Choice" does not begin after conception.

Herman, hate and ignorance are probably the two worst traits one can possess. And you have both in abundance.

You know, i never get you g... (Below threshold)

You know, i never get you guys. I almost wonder if you are kidding sometimes, or completely missing what the president said?

He wasn't asking you to switch and become pro-choice. He also wasn't asking to stop advocating your beleifs. He was saying that on both sides there are people, whose minds are firmly made up. So in looking for common ground, He said we all can agree we should work to stop unwanted pregnancies. if focusing on things like contraceptives, and adoption can reduce the amount of abortions. Why wouldn't you guys support that part of the statement?

Unless of course you are not really interested in slowing down unwanted pregnancy and are more interested in controlling womens bodies in an attempt to create brood mares for the state. I wonder which it is?

Um, jmc, "He"? We joke abo... (Below threshold)

Um, jmc, "He"? We joke about y'all treating Obama as a mesiah, but "He"?
As for stopping unwanted pregnancies, do you mean prevention? One big problem with many in the pro-choice crowd is that they see abortion as contraception. We can all agree, I hope, that prevention is key and laudable. But ask a cop or a doctor, prevention is not the same as stopping.
Your second paragraph, frankly, is something that even Hyperbolist would call a ridiculous strawman.

I'll ask you the same question I asked j58, however, so we can have a starting point and understand our starting points:

What about the life being aborted? It is a simple question (simple is rarely the same thing as easy)... which trumps which? The right to control what happens to your body or the right of the child within it to live.
With the exception of the much ballyhooed rape/incest scenarios, there were series of choices that were made regarding the control of the body that lead to most pregnancies.

The other day as a comment ... (Below threshold)
Paul Hooson:

The other day as a comment here and as a main feature at Wizbang Blue I raised the serious issue that the "prolife" community seems to always duck, that any overturn of Roe v. Wade doesn't outlaw abortion, but merely returns the issue back to the states which would mean that abortion would only remain legal in most states where it is now available, and only outlawed in a few conservative states in which abortion is rare already. An overturn of Roe v. Wade certainly will not change the availability of abortion much at all, despite all of the politics of people on both sides of Roe v. Wade. Further, later abortion decisions by the Supreme Court since since Roe v. Wade would probably still be intact, still allowing early term abortions, and only allowing states to outlaw later term abortions or partial birth abortions. Even the folks at the National Right To Life don't have a good answer to that reality.

Representative Henry Hyde once did offer a Human Life Amendment in congress before. However his own sex scandal helped to derail his own credibility. But such an amendment has a virtual zero chance of passing congress or a majority of the states.

Roe v. Wade or not, things are only likely to remain as they are now, where abortion is freely available in most states and larger cities, and only more rare in conservative states or smaller communities, and nothing will likely change that fact. And 53% of Americans still believe that abortion should remain legal under at least some circumstances, while at the same time more people like to call themselves "prolife" than "prochoice" today because they like the way that sounds to describe their views on the abortion issue.

That's the reality here.

Paul,Most anti-abort... (Below threshold)

Most anti-abortion/pro-life folks know that overturning RvW will not outlaw abortion. It would, however, take the issue out of the land of judicial fiat and return it to the public. From there legislation could be pursued at either the state or federal level, or more likely both.
It would also make it much easier to tackle the more repulsive practices in the abortion profession/industry, like late term abortions, partial birth abortions and avoiding parental consent/notification. All things that "pro-choice" groups like planned parenthood and NARAL fought to keep alive.

Unless of course you are... (Below threshold)

Unless of course you are not really interested in slowing down unwanted pregnancy and are more interested in controlling womens bodies in an attempt to create brood mares for the state. I wonder which it is?

jmc, what was the point of that statement? I see, you thought you were being clever. Again, the topic is pro-life verses pro-choice. Pro-choice means abortion of anything and everything regarding a live human fetus, which includes late term abortion. To a pro-lifer, there is no question that intentional abortion is murder. Slowing down unwanted pregnancies has nothing to do with addressing the current issue, which would mean investigating abortion clinics and drawing a line where conceiving a child becomes a throwaway commodity. "Disagreeing agreeably" does not address the issue, or the influence behind it.

I am Pro-Choice.... (Below threshold)
Jay in TX:

I am Pro-Choice.

I choose to try to talk as many people out of abortion as "an option" as I can.

I will not preach to them that "Abortion is murder".

I will tell them that I now believe it is.

I will tell them that I am guilty.

I will tell them that for the decades since my (now) wife and I decided that "we weren't ready", I have not been able to forget the life that we erased.

I will tell them that I look at my wonderful son and daughter and wonder who it was that they missed having as an older brother or sister.

What potential did I(we) destroy?

Who was it that I killed?

As you "Choose", please choose wisely.

Think about more than today's convenience.

Think about what you are really doing.

I told myself that it was just a bunch of cells.

I knew it wasn't.

I can't forget.

I hope you don't have to.

Hello SCSI, unfortunately t... (Below threshold)
Paul Hooson:

Hello SCSI, unfortunately that is wishful thinking to expect that most states or even the federal government would significantly move to protect life if Roe v. Wade was suddenly overturned which is highly unlikely. And previous Supreme Court decisions that came over the years since Roe would still protect early term abortions, and prevent the states from completely outlawing abortion. I don't really see where those in the "prolife" community have to go here. Enough persons will continue to support abortion under at least some circumstances and the political makeup of the governments at various levels including the states, governors and the U.S. Senate and Congress just isn't such that abortion will ever be outlawed, even if Roe v. Wade were somehow overturned.

Before Bill Clinton made his first Supreme Court choice, all nine justices on the Supreme Court were Republicans, and among those nine Republicans by a five to four margin they continued to uphold Roe v. Wade, so you can't even count on Republicans overturning Roe v. Wade, let alone Democrats. That's the cold reality here. If nine Republican justices won't even overturn Roe, then it just won't happen ever.

Paul, I am not expecting an... (Below threshold)

Paul, I am not expecting anything of most states, but as long as RvW is upheld, little if anything can even be attempted.
Early term abortion may never be eliminated. However, later term and partial birth, as we've already seen in the last 20 years, are another story.
However, your logic, I think is flawed. Slavery was allowed, segregation allowed, hard child labor and a host of "soft" evils (slavery wasn't a soft evil before some jackass tries to twist what I said) until enough people stood up and were heard. Abolitionists, I am sure, heard the argument that you'd never get all the states to change their laws...
Personally, I'd rather see a societal change where people found abortion for non-medical causes to be abhorrent.

First off, most legal exper... (Below threshold)

First off, most legal experts think Roe v Wade is "bad law". Due to it become a wedge issue all the "adults" in Washington don't want to touch it.

In the 80's 69% were pro choice. Now 53%. So, this is not a "settled" issue like Obama thinks.

Science and technology have caught up to this issue proving pain is felt by the unborn baby as it is torn apart piece by piece. But the lefties think smacking around a terrorist is torture but yet support the tearing apart of babies. Go figure. ww

Hello SCSI, I was raised as... (Below threshold)
Paul Hooson:

Hello SCSI, I was raised as a Catholic which has moral opposition to abortion as an important value and my family has long received mailings from the National Right To Life, and I'm very sympathetic to efforts that are prolife. However, I just don't see any mathematical way that abortion ever is abolished in the U.S.

I certainly understand that you believe that perhaps the public's views might shift and change such as on the slavery issue, however I don't think that the public views the issue in the same way as this for some unknown reason. There has probably been a slight shift in public views, but just not enough to really change the abortion issue.

And as I noted when all the Supreme Court members were Republicans before Bill Clinton made his first appointment, and yet there was still a 5 to 4 margin to retain Roe v. Wade, that was a perfect sign that in a room of nine Republican justices, they won't even overturn Roe v. Wade. The sympathy for overturning Roe is held by a minority with no mathematical way to make their opinion the law of the land, and even if they should succeed in overturning Roe, they probably can't get beyond problems in more liberal or larger states or past some other Supreme Court decisions allowing early term abortions. The current 5 to 4 margin favoring Roe will survive the Obama years, and whether Hillary Clinton or some Republican succeeds him in eight years, the current 5 to 4 margin in favor of Roe will still probably exist. I don't see how this issue changes myself. I'm just being a realist here.

Republican != pro life, any... (Below threshold)

Republican != pro life, anymore than Democrat != pro-abortion.
More conservatives vote republican, and more conservatives are pro life, perhaps.
I'm in the Knights of Columbus. It would be hard to find another group that is more pro-life than they aside from groups whose reason for being is to oppose abortion. Now find me a Knights Council that isn't riddled with Democrats. :)
If people wait for judges who favor their opinion come along to speak up and be counted, no change will come about. Those judges will never be appointed unless the politicians that agree with (or pander to) a position are elected. They won't be elected unless people advocate that position.
So again, I reject your someday will never come premise. Nothing in this world would change if that attitude ruled.

Dear Jay in Texas, F... (Below threshold)

Dear Jay in Texas,
First I want to thank you for sharing how you have tried to help others avoid the pain and grief you've gone through after an abortion. I don't understand why you would be prochoice, but I am truly glad are willing to encourage others not to suffer something so irrevocable.

On abortion and its effects there are numerous studies and solid information dating back to the 70's (yes, the 70's!) on the effects of abortion on not only the woman, but also the father of the child and the siblings when they find out about the abortion.
Even abortion clinic staff workers are known to have problems such as hearing babies that aren't there. (I think that putting together body parts to make sure that the abortion was completed successfully could be emotionally hard on a person, don't you?)
It's called Post Abortion Stress Syndrome or Trauma. Many women take up drink, do drugs, have 'replacement pregnancies', more abortions, multiple self-destructive relationships afterward. Sometimes they have trouble forming relationships with their next children. Sometimes they have damage and cannot successfully carry a pregnancy to term. The relationship that they try to save by having an abortion, is usually doomed statistically to end. That's just the tip of the iceberg.

There are wonderful organizations out there to help people deal with their abortion. Some are spiritually inclined, and some aren't. In Japan, the women have various methods of coping that would seem odd to us. It isn't just an American Judeo-Christian thing.

Why are the women's magazines silent on this?
It's not politically correct.

Why aren't the abortion industries and clinics not regulated for standard medical guidelines?
Political correctness.

Why can Planned Parenthood repeatedly encourage underage children to have abortions?
Greed and polical correctness and power.

Why do I care about the women who abort their babies, as well as the babies lost here forever?
Because I've talked to women who have had abortions. Even sophisticated women are deeply hurt and have damage because of it.

Listen, it isn't the cliche that Every Child should be a Wanted Child. With abortion, it's every Child who isn't wanted is a dead child.

The fallout is tremendous, and I care.
Our country used to be known for protecting the innocent until proved guilty. Now an innocent, defenseless human being is dismembered because of choices made by others. It's own mother.
Sometimes, it's own father.
No wonder so many are hurt.
I want this to end for everyone.

What kind of a moron equate... (Below threshold)
Jim Addison:

What kind of a moron equates miscarriages - "spontaneous abortion" - with intentional abortions? By that "logic," since some people die by natural causes, murder shouldn't be prohibited.

I do understand how such a person's parents might have wished they had aborted him rather than bring such stupidity into the world, but I cannot condone it.

Neither is the likelihood of Roe v Wade being overturned or superseded relevant in any way. The moral question is NOT one of "practical chances of success," it is one of simple right and wrong. Again, the slavery analogy fits well: when the abolitionist movement began in this country, it had little support and no practical chance of succeeding anytime soon. Should they have given up?

May God grant me the serenity to conceal my revulsion at those who condone the slaughter of innocents, that I may try anon to persuade them to turn away from their evil ways.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy