Some days ago, the Vatican said that Obama pledged to reduce abortions in the US, but no sooner did this hit the wires that the White House made it clear that the way this will be done is to "to change economic and social conditions so as to put more women in situations where they do not feel they have to have an abortion." Only says therefore that if the need isn't taken away (for whatever flimsy reason that may be), abortion on demand will always be the way to go.
It does not help much that the proposed healthcare program contains more federal funding for abortions, so in a sense, Obama is in a weird situation -- if he told the Pope that he was committed to reduce the number of abortions while "his" healthcare program will in fact increase abortions in the US, he was either lying or that he did not read the proposed bill. Either way is possible for the One really, as he and his allies have been doing it many times, right?
As I was telling a friend then, even if he were sincere with reduction in abortions, his position is untenable, because of the people he puts in positions that will influence the abortion issue on the liberal side. His Sec. of State, his HHS Sec., his recent SCOTUS appointment. In the news lately is his science czar, John Holdren, who has authored a 1977 book that "advocates for extreme totalitarian measures to control the population" through "laws requiring compulsory abortion", "illegitimate babies be put up for adoption", "require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions", "adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods", "sterilizing women after their second or third child", "long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin", among others.
H/T: MichelleIt does not help much that the proposed healthcare program contains more federal funding for abortions, so in a sense, Obama is in a weird situation -- if he told the Pope that he was committed to reduce the number of abortions while "his" healthcare program will in fact increase abortions in the US, he was either lying or that he did not read the proposed bill. Either way is possible for the One really, as he and his allies have been doing it many times, right?
As I was telling a friend then, even if he were sincere with reduction in abortions, his position is untenable, because of the people he puts in positions that will influence the abortion issue on the liberal side. His Sec. of State, his HHS Sec., his recent SCOTUS appointment. In the news lately is his science czar, John Holdren, who has authored a 1977 book that "advocates for extreme totalitarian measures to control the population" through "laws requiring compulsory abortion", "illegitimate babies be put up for adoption", "require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions", "adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods", "sterilizing women after their second or third child", "long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin", among others.
This is the US, but as I always say, things like this have a way of getting into our politicians's and policy makers's heads.
No comments:
Post a Comment