Obama - Above my pay grade????

Pocono Joe

So Obama thinks the question of the beginning of life is above his pay grade… see the real Obama viewpoints (2 sources listed in case one is blocked here):

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2NmMGNkMTdkZWJkZWRkMjRkNjY5NjllNzZlYjkyNmY=&w=MA==


http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/obama_live_born_abortion/2008/08/26/124988.html

turgon

The parents didnt want the kid. Just because a miracle happened and it survived the exit it should survive despite the wish of the parents? Thats like criticizing a mother for taking the morning after pill when a condom breaks: its stupid.

Hopefully the smart Americans will realize this and not be thrown by Obamas admirable willingness to see issues without being tainted by religion or creed.

I really like what Obama did. I was starting to doubt him relative to McCain,. but these articles have affirmed my fate in him as someone who can understand issues clearly.

Pocono Joe

It was more the point that Obama is being disingenuous about his views, but something in the response struck my eye…

"The parents didn’t want the kid. Just because a miracle happened and it survived the exit it should survive despite the wish of the parents? Thats like criticizing a mother for taking the morning after pill when a condom breaks: its stupid."

Interesting that several words in the above statement indicates "LIFE." Glad I was able to reaffirm some people’s faith in Obama.

Next I will aid in tackling the changing of the wording of "Birth Control" to "Tissue Growth Control," and the fight for the right of women to have unprotected sex with men they don’t want to have children with. I also vow to no longer ask a pregnant woman "How’s your baby doing?" I will now ask "How’s your body doing," since the object in question seemingly has no more rights than a cancerous growing tumor.

Like it or not, abortion will play a major role in this election. And the candidates will have to come to terms with their real viewpoints.

Hobbes

OK I had a wander for Obamas speech on the subject matter.

1. Basically the bill is a roundabout way to ban abortion.

2. While Obama spoke in opposition to the bill he did not actually vote no (voted present) for one particular bill. There were multiple bills which if all/most passed would of overridden Roe v Wade.

3. Obama actually voted for the Federal bill of the same thing (voted against State bill). The reason being is the language clarified that Roe v Wade would not be null and void.

4. The state that is mentioned in the bill already have rules on partial birth abortions that match what is mentioned in the bill. In that another doctor has to be on stand by in the event of a partial birth.

5. The bill was shot down by pro-choice Republicans, the Illinois Medical Society and over 40% of the Illinois senate.

6. The bill that eventually passed after Obama left was not the same wording and actually had agreement from the pro-choice crowds when previously it didn't.

Lastly Obama is pro-choice. But to smear him as some kind of baby killer is sensationlistic BS.

But hey don't take my word for it...

http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/08/19/fact_check_born_alive_1.php

Hobbes

Oh yea I would recommend reading Fact check if you come across an Obama story. Saves time rather then having someone else write what Obama got up to.

Pocono Joe

When I check facts it's at factcheck.org, not Obama's offical website as the source to all truths.

Here is what the real factcheck states... not quite Obama's version.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obama_and_infanticide.html

bonkey

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Like it or not, abortion will play a major role in this election.

I believe you may be right. When supporters of one major candidate feel the need to highlight their interpretation of the other major candidate's stance on the issue as a reason not to vote for him, then it can't be otherwise.

I don't see either McCain or Obama rushing out and saying "vote for me because this is my stance on abortion". Rather, I tend to to see supporters - and primarily McCain supporters like yourself - coming out and saying "don't vote for the other guy, because this is what I think his stance on abortion is".

And the candidates will have to come to terms with their real viewpoints.

They will also have to come to terms with what those who do not support them claim their viewpoints to be.

snow scorpion

"Above my pay grade"??

He wants to be made President of the United States and he thinks taking positions are above his pay grade?

If something is above the pay grade of the most powerful man on the planet, who is supposed to make the decision?

Hobbes

Pocono Joe wrote: »

When I check facts it's at factcheck.org, not Obama's offical website as the source to all truths.

I read that and it just pretty much verified what I had already read on the Obama site.

From the site:
"Obama's critics are free to speculate on his motives for voting against the bills, and postulate a lack of concern for babies' welfare. But his stated reasons for opposing "born-alive" bills have to do with preserving abortion rights, a position he is known to support and has never hidden."

As for his "Above my pay grade" comment it reads better if you read it in context.

When asked, "At what point does a baby get human rights?"

[Obama's response:] I think that whether you are looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade." He added that he supports the landmark decision Roe vs. Wade but said the issue has "moral and ethical content" and stressed his commitment to reducing the number of abortions."

So I would take sound bites with a pinch of salt as well.

Jack Sheehan

snow scorpion wrote: »

"Above my pay grade"??

He wants to be made President of the United States and he thinks taking positions are above his pay grade?

If something is above the pay grade of the most powerful man on the planet, who is supposed to make the decision?

Do you think it's not above his paygrade to decide when life begins? Is he god?

Pocono Joe

..."his stated reasons"... Is that sorta like Bill Clinton’s "That depends on what your definition of "is" is"?

bonkey

snow scorpion wrote: »

"Above my pay grade"??

He wants to be made President of the United States and he thinks taking positions are above his pay grade?

If something is above the pay grade of the most powerful man on the planet, who is supposed to make the decision?

I think you should look firstly at the issue of "seperation of powers". While its become almost-fashionable in the last 8 years to do so, we should not ignore the fact that the position of POTUS does not equate to "The Decider".

The decision of when life begins - of when life should be legally recognised to begin - is absolutely and categorically not one a President should be involved in. Ultimately, its a matter for the Supreme Court. Legislation which could effect it would come (IIRC) from the Senate. The President does not get to decide.

From a non-legal perspective, its more one for religious/spiritual leaders.

It was a loaded question to begin with, as were most questions that day. Obama took what was perhaps the least-worst option. He refused to answer the question, suggesting that it is neither the President's job to challenge religious beliefs on this issue nor to usurp responsibility from SCOTUS who's job (and thus pay-grade) it is to make such a decision.

I find it somewhat saddening that such a big deal is being made of a candiate who implied that he understands where the President's authority is actually supposed to end.

Hobbes

Pocono Joe wrote: »

..."his stated reasons"... Is that sorta like Bill Clinton’s "That depends on what your definition of "is" is"?

Why not come out and say exactly what it is you are trying to imply? That he is lying and that he likes killing children? Because that is what those puff pieces are trying to imply and you appear to be in your latest point.

So if you think he is lying come out and say it. Don't beat around the bush.

It is a fact he is pro-choice. I am sure there are pro-life people who think that equates to killing a child. That's not going to change.

CtrlSource

turgon wrote: »

The parents didnt want the kid. Just because a miracle happened and it survived the exit it should survive despite the wish of the parents?

Sorry, what? You agree with this barbarity? You think the nurse you raised her concern about this is wrong because it goes against the intention of the parents for the child to be aborted? How anyone who think what is described in that article is anything other than premeditated killing is beyond me.

The selfishness of those who abort due to something like Downs Syndrome is disgusting

Overheal

sorry source but my opinion on that matter is quite extreme so i cant say i agree with you. thats all ill say lest it result in trolling.

Pocono Joe

No need for people to put inaccurate words in my mouth! I do believe Obama when he stated the first thing he will do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act, which would effectively erase every federal and state restriction on abortion, no matter how modest. I feel his prior actions and stances substantiate that. I tend take many politicians at their words when actions back them up, and tend to ignore their internal operations when they kick into damage control and later state "What he/she meant…." I reluctantly admit that I am torn on the whole issue, and currently feel it should be a matter left up to the individual states (regional values), rather than federally controlled.

If he does really feel the way he has argued and voted in the past, then he should take that stance and live with the consequences… not pussy foot around it for political expediency. If every politician would argue the same, then no bill would ever be voted on because nothing is exactly the way everyone wants. The votes need to be taken for the majority of the bill, not the minutia.

jank

Thats fair. IMO it should be up to the states themselves but it should go to a popular vote. But i suppose then we would have the scenario we have in Ireland.
Women and girls going accross the Irish Sea to have an Abortaion. Out of sight out of mind.

But at least they would shut up about it and move onto something more worth while.

By the way I dont know what the Freedom of Choice act contains so I have to take you on your word

Manic Moran

Jack Sheehan wrote: »

Do you think it's not above his paygrade to decide when life begins?

Not in practical terms. Consider God as having delegated the decision-making authority down to the lawmakers. After all, He is not going to come down from On High and vote in the Senate, neither is He going to sit at a desk in the Oval Office and decide whether to sign or veto a piece of abortion-related legislation.

NTM

Hobbes

Manic Moran wrote: »

After all, He is not going to come down from On High and vote in the Senate,

It would probably clear a lot of this crap up if he did.

neither is He going to sit at a desk in the Oval Office and decide whether to sign or veto a piece of abortion-related legislation.

Some of the US hard core Christians see the president as basically thier version of the pope. So while it might not be the big G, they certainly believe the president is an extension of that.

Women and girls going accross the Irish Sea to have an Abortaion. Out of sight out of mind.

Actually now that I think of it, they would have to cater for that mess as well. I mean do you detain a woman from leaving her state if she has a baby?

interested if they thought of that as well.

jank

Hobbes wrote: »

Actually now that I think of it, they would have to cater for that mess as well. I mean do you detain a woman from leaving her state if she has a baby?

interested if they thought of that as well.

Im sure there would be another battle for this type of scenario for the next 30years as well.

Bottle_of_Smoke

I'm pro choice but not the extent where the baby could be born alive/ that's appalling