Grandpa Obama

While speaking at a town hall style meeting in Pennsylvania, Senator Obama was posed with a question regarding AIDS/HIV, STD, and sex education in our schools. During his response, Obama made the following statement:

"I've got two daughters -- 9 years old and 6 years old," Obama said. "I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby. ... So it doesn't make sense to not give them information."

Many have focused on the words “punished” and “mistake,” and rightly so. Whether intentionally or not, Obama pretty much summarized the sentiments of many Progressives, that every unwanted pregnancy should be looked upon as a mistake, and the only cure is abortion.

Most have ignored the fact that Mr. Obama referred to the punishment as a “baby,” which is a far cry from cold and heartless term fetus, the preferred name of the pro-abortion movement (wouldn't want people to actually think that a woman had a little human growing in their stomach.....noooooooo). There is no debate that when you use the word “baby,” you are talking about a human being, a living soul deserving of our protection. Maybe it was a “Freudian Slip,” a causal lapse of memory, but Obama forgot to use the “Official Pro-Choice Terminology Handbook,” and acknowledged life within the womb. The greater mistake is knowing that we have the power to protect a living miracle, choosing instead the killing of a child, and in the case of Obama, his grandchild.

The fact that Senator Obama was so willing to allow his grandchild to be killed is a mystery to me, and I am sure to millions of Americans. How can Senator Obama say out of one side of his mouth that children are a miracle, but speak of abortion as the answer to an “unwanted” miracle?

But what about those who support Senator Obama's comments, or abortion in general? What are they saying? Their callous and uncaring words are like cold water to the face while asleep:

From thecarpetbaggerreport.com:

On April 2nd, 2008 at 1:47 pm, Gregory said:

Badly played by Obama’s campaign. Obama’s phrasing was clumsy, but what has the wingnuts’ knickers in a twist is that Obama noted, correctly, that the anti-sex forces’ agenda is in fact to punish women for having sex. Looked at holistically, the conclusion is inescapable. His campaign should continue to drive that wedge — that the so-called “pro-life” forces seem much more about punishing women for having sex than pursuing any kind of rational policy, and indeed they oppose rational policy — such as contraception and sex ed — as “radical.”

It’s time to move the Overton window away from the anti-sex kooks.

On April 2nd, 2008 at 1:49 pm, Shalimar said:

Complaining is what conservatives do, and they will continue on this issue day after day until they find something new to be “outraged” about. IMO, they’re just mad because Obama’s language hit upon the crux of the conservative anti-abortion agenda. For most of them it has nothing to do with helping babies, it’s all about punishing women for having sex.

On April 2nd, 2008 at 2:00 pm, Coltrane said:

I really hope they keep with this criticism; most people, including many that are pro-life, understand through their own experience that children are a great burden, and that considering them to be a ‘punishment’ is not as outrageous as the few loudmouths are making it out to be. I mean, honestly, let’s face it, many americans will look at their own children and think to themselves “Yup, I am being punished.”

Cynical take, I know, but I really don’t think this is going to do anything to hurt obama except among people that wouldn’t ever vote for him based on the fact that he is pro-choice. It actually serves to dilute the general message against him into a bit of ‘noise’ I think.

On April 2nd, 2008 at 2:07 pm, Jay said:

Uh. Don’t the religious right people think that a woman should be punished with a baby for engaging in sex? Isn’t their position “Oh well. You should have thought of that before you had sex”? That’s punishment.

NOTE: Up next.............. statistics! The truth (Gallup poll): 35 percent support abortion rights when the woman or family cannot afford to raise the child (the leading reason abortions are performed in America!).

On April 2nd, 2008 at 2:27 pm, Shade Tail said:

What a lot of people don’t seem to realize is that the country is overwhelmingly pro-choice. If I recall correctly, the numbers are something like 70% pro-choice. Even registered republicans tend to be pro-choice. And the pro-life sheep who would take this “controversy” seriously are the same people who would never vote for a democrat in the first place.

So I think that if Obama stands up to this and throws it back in their faces, it could backfire on them magnificently. And he already has a history of doing just that with GOP smears and talking points.

NOTE: The delay between the posting times was because this group of “free-thinkers” couldn't stay on topic and starting debating who lied more, Clinton or Obama.

On April 2nd, 2008 at 4:23 pm, Rowdy said:

Can we please stop using phrases like “abortion rights”? It’s a “woman’s right to choose.” No one is “pro-abortion” we’re “pro-choice.”

Words matter.

NOTE: See, they really do have an Official Pro-Choice Terminology Handbook.

On April 2nd, 2008 at 5:20 pm, karen marie said:

the christianists are a mind-boggling group. sadly, they are also dangerous in that they sincerely believe that the bible is a greater authority than the united states constitution. their insistence that any indication of nono-alignment with their belief system is not only unacceptable but a direct attack on them leaves the rest of us with no choice but to reduce theiir participation in any discussion which lies outside of the four walls of the church and the immediate homes of their members.

if there were any justice in this country, there would be NO tax exempt status for ANY religious organization and only organizations which contribute in a practical way — food to the hungry, education scholarships, etc — would be tax exempt. political contributions would also be specifically prohibited from any tax exempt status.

if the rule is going to be that you have to pay to play, well, then, let’s just make that the rule across the board.

NOTE: Ahhhh, gotta have a little Christian bashing to prove we are “free-thinkers.”

The rantings of self professed intellectuals on this website, as well as others, are representative of a group of people blindly promising to bring “Hope” and “Change” to America, but at what cost?