Posted By: J. Brown  on Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Before you go busting Obama for his answer on abortion, you should check your facts. According to the CDC, the number of abortions peaked in 1990 at 1,429,247, and has dropped fairly steadily since. However, 2000 to 2004 (the last reporting year I could find) went from 857,475 to 839,226. In other words, In the 10 years after 1990, it dropped 40%, in the first 4 under Bush, it dropped 2%. Now say you're sorry.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5609a1.htm

Posted By: geoff  on Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Hey, Jonah: when was the last time you were pregnant? were any of your pregnancies "unwanted" (i.e. the result of an "accident," rape, or some boyfriend who didn't want to face his responsibilities)? So, to go back to scripture: who are you to judge someone else's response to something that is difficult enough without you poking your fingers into something that should be a private matter and none of your business?

And let's get some figures here: how many of these "Born-Alive Infants" are we talking about? just some innuendo about one case...? Is this something Congress & every "columnist" should be foaming at the mouth about, or something maybe the American Medical Association should be discussing? Or are you willing to admit that this is just a wedge issue, meant to both try to undermine Roe vs. Wade & distract attention away from reality (wars, mortgage crisis, deficit, etc.)?

Posted By: Rebecca  on Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Goldberg's column  is not about judging women's response to unwanted/accidental pregnancies;  he is, correctly, pointing out that Obama plays fast and loose on tough issues like this.  He simply opted out--again--of a tough question, choosing to make a non-answer his answer.  Real leaders make tough choices and have moral certitude, regardless of whether or not we the voters agree with it. Assuming that his stance on the  Born Alive Infants Act is true, then his viewpoint on the issue of when life begins is evident. Just SAY IT, that's all. And if this anecdotal illustration of dying-baby-in-closet-is true, is it relevant whether it was an isolated incident or not? If one finds something morally reprehensible, does said act need to be repeated in order to justify the reprehension? And don't misunderstand; I don't have the answers either and don't begin to assume that such an issue is black and white but rather fraught with nuance.   Whether of not we, the voters, agree with him is ancillary;  his answering a tough question is something that anyone who really wants "change" deserves.



You are correct in your assertion that this is a wedge issue, but it is so for a reason.  Neither side can nor will ever agree on something that is so emotionally charged, and both sides play it to thier advantage. But it was fair game in that particular forum, and both candidates knew that it would be addressed.  

Posted By: George  on Thursday, August 21, 2008

"Pro-choicers" including Obama and NARAL miss the fundamental point when they argue that the question of when life begins is a "personal issue" and any attempt to define it is an "imposition of religious belief." It is a fundamental question for the law. Consider the question of murder, which is defined as the unjustified taking of a human life. There are 3 issues, justification, life and human being. If we defer for the time being on the question of justification we are still left with the question of what constitutes a living human being. Thus you cannot define murder unless you are capable of defining a living human being. Thus we are left with a question that the law must address. QED.

Posted By: Cowgirl Up! Texas  on Thursday, August 21, 2008

Moral obfuscation has become one of Obama's campaign MO's.

Wanted or not; botched abortion or not, a living, kicking, screaming baby human is a person - with all the intrinsic rights granted to any person under the law.

If Obama doesn't get this basic moral fact, it is one other big red banner declaring him unfit for US President.  Perhaps he could move to the newly forming Soviet Union and run for office there.

Posted By: ALT  on Thursday, August 21, 2008

People who support "Pro Choice", such as myself, believe you should no more be able to force a woman to continue to carry a baby (fetus) than you should be able to force her to have a tumorous growth remain in her body.  



NO I'm not comparing one to the other.  I am saying that regardless of your definition of when life begins, it can't survive without the woman providing life support.  I don't like abortion any more than anyone else, I just believe it isn't my choice nor yours!



As far as Born Alive fetuses are concerned, A mistake by the doctor isn't devine intervention.  Let the fetus/baby die.

Posted By: John Handforth  on Thursday, August 21, 2008

Logically, I can see the need for legalized abortion in certain circumstances, such as rape, incest and survival of the mother.



Morally, I couldn't do it, when my wife and I faced a problem.  When my wife had our second child, giving us two girls, she was told NOT to get pregnant again.  Well, she waited five years and decided to roll the dice for a son.



It was a horrible pregnancy, and she had used up most of our medical coverage for maternity by the end of her fourth month.  We talked about abortion and made the trip to New York, where it was legal.  The doctor sat us down and discussed many things with us, especially how we would feel about losing a child.  He then sent us outside to think about it before making a decision.



We went outside, sat on the steps, had a cigarette and some enlightening conversation.  I'd been thinking abortion because I was worried about her.  She'd been thinking about it because she was concerned about me having to raise two girls alone.  When we realized that we just couldn't do it, we got up and went home.



She was hospitalized four times to keep her body from aborting that baby.  She did live, but she went back to New York to be one of the first 300 women in the Country to be sterilized by laser surgery.  We had another girl who has given me five grandchildren.  My wife only got to see one of them, because she was killed by a drunk driver, but that's another story.



The choice should be there, but not just for convenience, like wanting the other gender, because you forgot to take the pill that week, or because you don't want to ruin your summer vacation.

In reference to the last paragraph, directly above, by ALT, IT HAD TO BE DIVINE INTERVENTION THAT ALLOWED THAT BABY TO LIVE.  ALT should be thrown to the wolves, naked, bleeding and handcuffed.  That's comparable to letting a baby die on purpose.

Birth control has been around for more than forty years.  Use it!

Posted By: Good Life  on Thursday, August 21, 2008

Until a doctor looks you in the eye and says, "Your baby could be a real mess" you have no idea what your position on abortion is.