How does McCain spell relief? P-A-L-I-N

Jay, Would you be able to vote for any candidate on the sole criteria that they were against abortion? I ask because I think that a pro-abortion candidate is capable of having other "positions" that are disaterous in their their total effect, for the culture of life, and for a lot of other things.

Look. We have had a supreme court that is pro-life ideologically, and yet, abortion is still legal. We have had a president who has (in my opinion) brought our country to near financial ruin, and a number of other contries too, who has isolated us from the world, and is responsible for an enormous amount of suffering and death throughout the world. But, he is anti-abortion, and still, 8 years later, abortion is legal. He even appointed the supreme court judges to tip the scale in favor of ending abortion...but abortion is still legal.

I really think pro-life, culture of life should stop encouraging single-issue voting, and focus on a ground assault agaisnt abortion.

if you keep encouraging people to vote for big oil presidents, big business presidents, expanssionist presidents, - presidents who want to increase the gap between rich (business!) and poor, this country is going to be disassembled in no time.

I'm pro-life. But eight years of republican government has resulted in no change inthe legality of abortion, and has in the mean time, destroyed the lives of so many people throughout the world.

Yes Lucian, I'm sure God works within your time frame. To hell with trying to save babies.. Let's just vote in satan himself because he promises our lives will be better.

Lucian,
First, if a candidate had an obviously flawed position, such as s/he wanted to eradicate a race from the earth but was pro-life, I would not vote for them. However, if two candidates have reasonably acceptable views, I'm not ever going to vote my pocketbook over the life of a child.

Second, we aren't talking about two moderates with a slightly different viewpoint. Senator Obama voted to allow doctors to simply watch a baby die after a botched abortion. That view should be abhorrent to anyone but the most extreme pro-abortionists. And I think you have to ask yourself: can a person like that really run the country better?

Third, the Supreme Court hasn't made abortion illegal, but they have put restrictions in place and upheld restrictions that would not be in place with a more liberal court. They are moving us clearly in a more pro-life direction and I believe lots of children have been saved by the makeup of our current Supreme Court (thanks to Bush). It is absurd to say that Bush's term "has resulted in no change in the legality of abortion." I highly recommend doing some research.

Fourth, you say Bush is "responsible for an enormous amount of suffering and death throughout the world." This is naive at best - remember that Saddam was using poisonous gas on his own people before Bush stepped in. I don't think we should necessarily debate whether Bush is right or the media is right, but don't try and justify voting for someone like Senator Obama by saying "Bush is bad." Remember, Bush is out of office come December.

I sincerely hope and pray that you consider voting the pro-life ticket this Fall. If enough pro-lifers vote for over-the-top pro-abortionists then we'll end up with only pro-abortionists to vote for. What matters more to you: The moral or the economic?

God bless,
Jay

okay, let us ignore the abortion issue and broaden our perspective. The Roman Catholic Church mentions four non-negotiable issues apart from abortion:

1. Embryonic Stem Cell Research
2. Euthanasia
3. same sex marriage
4. cloning

added to the abortion criteria, Obama scores a zero out of five. Maybe if Obama and McCain both had comparable scores there might be room for legitimate Catholic diversity of voting decision.

What I would like to know is why do pro-"choicers" who refuse to vote for pro-life candidates solely because of this "single issue" never get told to avoid simplistic single-issue voting strategies?

uhhhh Lucian and Nate

You note, "I'm pro-life. But eight years of republican government has resulted in no change in the legality of abortion..."

1)I'm probably wrong but didn't partial birth abortion get banned?

2)Nate you're killin me man I cant stop laughing at your terse but true perspective... I'm glad you're posting more frequently.

In love

when we were one

No Nate!

Why don't we just vote for McCain, because, like Bush did, he promises to make us safe - and to make us happy! It is after all, all about "U.S."

Here are timely reflections by an important Old Testament theologian that matter as far as this coming election:

From Walter Brueggemann's most recent book, Mandate to Make a Difference.

1. Everybody has a script.

2. We are scripted by the process of nurture, formation, and socialization that may go under the large rubric of liturgy.

3. The dominant scripting of both selves and communities in our society, for both liberals and conservatives, is the script of therapeutic, technological, consumer militarism that permeates every dimension of our common life.

4. That script promises to make us safe and happy.

5. That script has failed.

6. Health depends, for society and for members of it, on disengagement from and relinquishment of that script.

7. It is the task of the church and its ministry to de-script from that powerful script.

8. That task is undertaken through the steady, patient, intentional articulation of an alternative script that we testify will indeed make us safe and joyous.

9. That alternative script as an offer of a counter-metanarrative is rooted in the Bible and enacted through the tradition of the church.

10. That alternative script has as its defining factor the Key Character in all holiness, the God of the Bible who is variously Lord and Savior of Israel, Creator of heaven and earth, and is fleshed in Jesus, we name as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

11. That script of this God of power and life is not monolithic, one-dimensional, or seamless, and we should not pretend that we have such an easy case to make.

12. The ragged disjunctive quality of the counter-script to which we testify cannot be smoothed out and made seamless, as both historical-critical study and doctoral reductionism have tried to do.

13. The ragged disputatious character of the counter-script to which we testify is so disputed and polyvalent that its adherents are always tempted to quarrel among themselves.

14. The entry point into the counter-script is baptism.

15. The nurture, formation and socialization into the counter-script with this elusive, irascible Key Character at its center constitute the work of ministry.

16. Ministry is conducted in the awareness that most of us are deeply ambiguous about this alternative script.

17. The good news, I judge, is that our ambivalence as we stand between scripts is precisely the primal venue for the work of God's spirit.

18. Ministry, and the mission beyond ministry, is to manage that inescapable ambivalence that is the human predicament in faithful, generative ways.

19. IF what I have said is true, then it follows that the work of ministry is crucial, pivotal, and indispensable; as in every society, so in our society.

Jay,

The pro-abortion machine of OBama and Binder. What can they actually do as President & VP to cause more abortions? The supreme court is already stacked to stop it - but it hasn't.

All anyone has to do to get your vote is be "pro-life" (as in anti-abortion), and whatever they think on the other issues just doesn't matter. Is there a single issue on the plate that either Palin or McCain could change their mind on 180 degrees (other than abortion) that would make you reconsider voting for them?

If not, I suggest that you are simply promoting mindless, single-issue voting.

Sarah Palin: Guns + God +War +Fundamentalism!!!

I guess for people who are anti-abortion, the election is over for all practical purposes. Simply because McCain and Palin say they are “anti-abortion” (though they actually say “pro-Life”), they have your vote.

You are in the back pocket of big oil (“drill, drill, drill” is the new GOP mantra; George Bush is banking on that!), big business, and all the extremely wealthy whose lobbyists are lining the pockets of Republican politicians to keep the money flowing, tax free. People who work for a living and are barely scraping by, by and large say that a vote for McCain is a vote for near homelessness for their families.

Sarah Palin is a fundamentalist! She believes in war. She shoots animals from airplanes, and according to one article she has been known to kill 40 caribou in a single outing (was that for fun? Or did she eat all that meat?). Let’s see. You put God and war (declared in God’s name) and guns and fundamentalism together… hmmmm. Now that’s a “left-behind” movie script if I’ve ever seen one.

There should be, in my opinion, a distinction made between “anti-abortionists” and “Pro-Life”. When someone’s “pro-Life” position promotes executions (see Bush’s record-holding executing state of Texas), isolationists global economic policies (what IS going on in Dafur? Do we care?), global militarism (your stuff is really our stuff), and conspicuous consumption that results in impoverishment and death on a global scale.

This rant recognizes that there is more than one issue involving LIFE in this election. You guys need to determine the extent to which your vote for GOP “drill, drill, drill” is actually going to directly result in the abortion of babies, and whether or not putting your time and energies elsewhere in the fight against abortion may actually save more lives on planet earth (born and unborn). But you won’t do this because it is easier to just ask one question, see whose answer is right, and then go about business as usual.

DeoOmnis does not promote the Catholic Pro-Life position, but single-issue politics. This is irresponsible.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Sarah Palin Pro-Contraception and pro-capital punishment? I believe so.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Sarah_Palin.htm

Please don't give me the "negotiable" mularky about capital punishment. There is no Church leader in his right mind who is going to suggest that our modern world needs to execute criminals.

So, again, a "pro-Life" candidate is pulling the wool over the eyes of "anti-abortion" Catholics and garnering votes for big businessmen who care not one bit about unborn babies, people on death row, the environment, or anything else for that matter, except their own income.

Palin is not "pro-Life" - she is pro-Palin, and that's all.

come on Jay - post my rants!

Lucian,
So if a politician promised to do everything that's important to you, but also wanted to wipe out one race/nationality/religion of people, you would still vote for them?

Think about it, because if you say no then it's "mindless, single-issue voting" according to you. Yes, some issues are worth putting at the top of an agenda.

I have a question for you: what is Obama going to do that's so important you would sacrifice more lives to get it done? Obama actually stopped a bill that would have required doctors to provide medical assistance to babies born in botched abortions. Is that ethical? If not, what moral platform can he stand on?

Frankly, both men are likely to pursue similar agendas, but with a very few differences. You have to decide which of those differences is worth voting for one man over another. I personally feel that moral issues take precedence over fiscal issues every time. So I'm voting for the man that runs on my moral issues. It isn't single-issue voting: Obama is pretty much against everything I stand for morally. He's for gay marriage, abortion, and seems to support euthanasia (it's difficult to tell with him, since he changes his mind so much).

I'm having a difficult time understanding why you're for him. What policies are you voting for? Obama has backed off his plan to pull out of Iraq. It sounds to me that you're just voting for him because you don't like Bush, which makes you the mindless voter, not me.

Nothing is worth sacrificing the soul of our country for - and our country's soul depends on our moral standing. Period.

God bless,
Jay

Questions for Lucian...

Are you for or against contraception?

Are you for or against abortion?

Are you for or against the death penalty?

Are you for or against Roe vs. Wade?

Are you for or against appointing Justices that would overturn Roe vs. Wade?

Are you for or against gay marriage or civil unions?

Are you for or against gay couples adopting children?

Are you for or against laws requiring or at least allowing doctors to care for babies that survive abortions?

"Sarah Palin is a fundamentalist! She believes in war. She shoots animals from airplanes, and according to one article she has been known to kill 40 caribou in a single outing (was that for fun? Or did she eat all that meat?). Let’s see. You put God and war (declared in God’s name) and guns and fundamentalism together… hmmmm. Now that’s a “left-behind” movie script if I’ve ever seen one."

Do you have any specific credible documentation for your above quote, or is it just a smear?

Do you have any historical knowledge of fundementalism and pentecostalism or do you just automatically lump them together for smear purposes?

Could Obama say or do anything that would cause you not to vote for him?

Feel free to answer yes, no, explain, or dodge any of the above questions. It's my opinion that you cannot nail an Obama supporter down on any issue except "a woman's right to choose", so in my opinion Democrats are the single issue voters because you can get them to compromise on any issue but that. Compare that to McCains record of compromise to try and address issues that you claim to care about like immigration and poverty, etc.

Dave Armstrong is addressing this very issue on his website. Those who say pro-lifers are single issue voters are completely hypocritical in my view. They [pro-choice i.e. death]vote against a candidate specifically BECAUSE they are pro-life. You can't have it both ways Lucian.

http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2008/09/pathetic-one-issue-voter-canard-on.html

Jay: “Frankly, both men are likely to pursue similar agendas, but with a very few differences. You have to decide which of those differences is worth voting for one man over another. I personally feel that moral issues take precedence over fiscal issues every time.”

Jay, you have a fundamental misfire by your thinking that fiscal issues (national and global) do not have moral consequences.

SKelly:
“Are you for or against contraception? Yes, against!

Are you for or against abortion? Against!

Are you for or against the death penalty? Against!

Are you for or against Roe vs. Wade? Against!

Are you for or against appointing Justices that would overturn Roe vs. Wade? Yes! We’ve accomplished this…Roe v. Wade is still there???

Are you for or against gay marriage or civil unions? Against!

Are you for or against gay couples adopting children? Against!

Are you for or against laws requiring or at least allowing doctors to care for babies that survive abortions? Life begins at conception…guess my response to this!!!

Do you have any specific credible documentation for your above quote, or is it just a smear? Nothing any less credible than any other newspaper report (I’ll find the article and link it, no time right now). But, of course, I doubt she has kept an excel spread sheet on the number of kills she has.

Do you have any historical knowledge of fundamentalism and pentecostalism or do you just automatically lump them together for smear purposes? I likely know more about fundamentalism than most. I used to be one! I know (or read in a newspaper article) that 1) Palin is a creationist (the earth is only 4K years old etc etc) 2) the Iraq war was God’s will.

Could Obama say or do anything that would cause you not to vote for him? Yes! He could make it clear that he intends to make it an administrative priority to systematically increase the murder of innocent unborn babies by abortion.

Listen, a single-minded pro-Life position (=”anti-abortion”) is dangerous because it fails to try and take into consideration the 1) the costs of anti-life fiscal policies, anti-life international relation policies, and so on; 2) the long-term picture of a Culture of Life; 3) What exactly a President and VP can actually effect in terms of abortion, capPunishment, moral-global-economics, moral-global military policies and so forth. So what if McCain or Palin’s opinion of abortion is like mine, if the bulk of the GOP platform nurtures a culture of death on a global scale, and usually by economic means. Economics and morality, Jay, do go hand-in-hand in this world.

Matthew, I disagree with you and Armstrong! And the way single-issue "anti-abortion" Catholics want it...just ain't gonna happen. YOU can't have it both ways, because you will always be voting GOP Repulicans into office because they say they're "pro-Life", even after Roe v. Wade is gone. And with their adminstrations comes death on a global scale. There is nothing consistent about that kind of Life ethic at all.

The last words of Armstrong's article:

"Christians don't vote for Herod, do they?" Hmmm...no, I wouldn't vote for a guy that ordered the murder of innocents in Judea. But then again, they were out of the womb (maybe some weren't), so they weren't as "innocent" as an unborn baby...so, maybe I'd look the other way about that. Don't roll your eyes...I've read some people here making this very argument, that unborn children are more innocent than living children, say, starving tortured and murdered children in Sudan. So, we'll focus our attention on just the unborn instead of them. In other words...

...certainly No! Catholic Christians do not vote for Herod. But some like Armstrong will vote for the Roman Empire, and then go about their business....

She shoots animals from airplanes, and according to one article she has been known to kill 40 caribou in a single outing (was that for fun? Or did she eat all that meat?).

For the record, the Alaska State Wildlife Agency uses areal hunting to control the population of wolves. Sarah Palin supported allowing private citizens to obtain licenses to assist in this problem. Currently the voters of Alaska have banned private areal hunting.

Sarah Palin shooting 40 caribou in a single outing? She must have used an RPG or a hand grenade!? Seriously... Either you made this up or you have your facts mixed up. Either way you look rather uninformed. You can't get a license to kill 40 caribou. I think you better find time to post the sources of such outlandish tails as those you have spun here.

The ASWA may kill many wolves in a single day but that is not exactly the same thing is it? It pays to do your own research. It took me less than 5 minutes to debunk this smear.

Nothing any less credible than any other newspaper report (I’ll find the article and link it, no time right now). But, of course, I doubt she has kept an excel spread sheet on the number of kills she has.

Newspaper articles are not always credible. Left wing blogs and animal rights groups can be even less credible.

Lucian,

What are Obama's pro culture of life policies that he promises to enact that make of for his support of abortion?

The left has brought us "carbon offsets", so Al Gore can fly his jet guilt free. Now what are the specific "abortion offsets" that make you so happy to vote for Obama?

(at least the killing and starving of born children is not "legal". should the Republicans go to war against the child killers in Africa? no that would be culture of war/death wouldn't it. if Bush were so pro death then he would have pulled out of Iraq after ousting Hussein when we lost hardly any men, but he didn't want the people of Iraq to suffer again under another dictator he's tried to give them a chance to build a free and democratic society, the only kind of society that is not at war with U.S., either militarily, economically, or terroristically. don't roll your eyes I like to make up words...)

Nate,

I'm glad you feel pretty good about your self-appraisal "debunking" my "smear" (in five minutes! very good!). You fail to recognize the subjectivity of your own self-appraisal (ironic), let alone your assessment of whatever resources you decide are credible or not. Thats all I'll respond to you.

skelly,

"at least the killing and starving of born children is not "legal"". Then we should be embarrassed, shouldn't we? What does "American national 'interest'" have to do in the life and death of children throughout the world? We won't get involved unless we have either an economic interest, or a "strategic interest" (read "economic" here too!). And even worse, we remain ignorant of the global cost of our lifestyle.

The GOP does a better job of "turning away" than the Democrats, and remaining ignorant of the costs, of the human beings ground up by the system. Maybe McCain and Palin, if spoken to alone from there heart-of-hearts, are aware of this. But they cannot get into office without making promises to big businesses that rely on the system to make the millions of dollars, a system that does the grinding.

Democratic or GOP, it is ultimately about a lifestyle that has caused the separation between the grossly wealthy, and the grossly poor. The GOP seems to me to be more committed to the grossly wealthy, which ultimately translates into a lifestyle that means suffering and death for millions of children around the world.

Lucian,

Nate debunks your post and you say well your subjective Nate so I can't respond. The fact is you post as fact rumors that you cannot back up with documented facts.

Yes, we should be embarrassed that abortion is legal in the U.S.

What is your plan for Africa?

The "system" is, you work hard and or risk capitol to make money. Yes, there are crooks who invest money in politicians in both parties to use the government to get sweet deals. This is why you need to support McCain/Palin not the Democrats. I guarantee you the rich crooks who use goverment policy to make them richer do not want McCain and Palin in office.

And by the way, the American lifestyle is cleaner, healthier and more efficient than the third world that is why the world needs to be freer and more developed. We need to export much of our lifestyle to the world, not the other way around. We can't just hand out food and medicine, people need to learn to farm and build industry so societies can join the global economy and come up to our level. We don't need to go backwards, they need to go forward. Yes, they need more cars, trains, planes, tractors and bull dozers in the world. They need more coal, oil, natural gas, any resource to power technology to bring them into the modern world. Yes, people need real houses and need to take a bath everyday and some real food to eat. You know what prevents aids in Africa, get circumsed and don't have sex with someone who has aids. Yes, abstain or be in a monogamous relationship. The world needs the American dream, get married and raise a family and have a nice house and have something to work hard for. And yes, we could go in and defeat and kill all the dictators and warlords in Africa to free the suffering children but then to you we would just be quilty of genocide and empirialism because some American companies could sure make some money in a free and prosperous Africa (or middle east, asia, or south america for that matter) instead of all the criminals and crooked communist or islamic dictators and warlords that are making a killing now, no pun intended. But go ahead, blame America if that makes you happy, your entitled to your opinion and have a right to express it, thanks to all the veterans that have died to protect it.

I can't wait for your next post so I can get another head ache rolling my eyes.

The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the poster and do not necessarily reflect the views of DeOmnisGloria.com or its sponsors. These are my opinions based on my subjective view of the world so I will not be providing any documentation from credible, non-credible, existing or non existing sources.

Thanks...

skelly, "abortion offsets" is a great way to describe the futile attempt to whitewash the tombs of the unborn.

I will only respond today to Skelly’s amazing comment “ the American lifestyle is cleaner, healthier and more efficient than the third world that is why the world needs to be freer and more developed. We need to export much of our lifestyle to the world, not the other way around. “ - and the flotsam that follows. This is without a doubt perhaps the most uninformed, ethnocentric comment I’ve ever read on this blog (on which I’ve lurked for a number of months). Skelly, you obviously have a cultural superiority complex. The North American, Western European lifestyle is barely sustainable as it is (many think it already isn’t).

The US ecological resource consumption and waste production footprint, is bigger than any other region on the planet. If every other country became like us – as is your hope, prayer, or goal!!??!! – then the biosphere would simply be destroyed. Of course, the first to go would be all those (not-so-innocent) starving children in third-world, and developing nations…so, we wouldn’t have to worry about things as immediately. Felling pretty good about that.

The larger the footprint, the larger the death. Our lifestyle does not reflect committment to a "Culture of Life."

I simply think that a democratic adminsitration may result in a smaller footprint...and, more LIFE.

Educate yourself: You can start (but only a start) at this URL: http://www.seri.at/
Then spend some time here: http://www.footprintnetwork.org/

Spend some time at the WHO site too!

My tone is harsh because of the willful ignorance and perhaps, hubris here.

Lucian,

My information is widely known fact and common sense. I tell you what, I'll post my sources for you. I won't expect you to post yours because we both know there are not any.

http://www.wildlife.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=control.sap
(From the government website, again it doesn't make much sense that anyone would be killing multiple caribou by aerial hunting given this information)

http://wildlife.alaska.gov/regulations/pdfs/caribouid.pdf
(Strict restrictions for hunting in Alaska)

http://wildlife.alaska.gov/management/control/predator_booklet.pdf
(More info on predator control)

http://greenopolis.com/myopolis/blogs/david-d/sarah-palins-views-aerial-hunting
(An article in opposition of Palin)

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/lat-cariboumo_k6fqg3nc20080831045251,0,3651452.photo
(I'm sure she got 30 of these one day...)

She shoots animals from airplanes, and according to one article she has been known to kill 40 caribou in a single outing (was that for fun? Or did she eat all that meat?). Let’s see.

What article??

Lucian,
Your "tone" is the same as it has been for each of your posts.

I stand by my comment.

You can stand by your left wing websites and your communist ideals.

I hope your doing all you can to reduce your own footprint, (not like Al "Private Jet, Carbon Offset" Gore).

If your hoping for a lot more lip service to your cause and American taxpayers' money offered to the UN beauracratic machine then the Democrats are what your hoping for.

PS- All blissfull ignorance, flotsam, and hubris aside. You do realize that more "Life" means a bigger "Footprint" don't you.

Guys

I must say that since no one responded to my query: "I'm probably wrong but didn't partial birth abortion get banned?" I was forced to do some research.

I found this 1) There is now a ban under GWB presidency http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial-Birth_Abortion_Ban_Act

so the argument that with a "fixed" court, nothing has gotten done is now FALSE. In fact it was only in 2007 that THIS court UPHELD that law.

2) The number of partial birth abortions done every year numbered in the thousands... estimated 5k per year. Initial estimates of 500 per year were fabricated as notes the NYT in 1997

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F07E7DA173BF932A15750C0A961958260

Indeed, 5000 lives per year since 2003 is a start. To demand immediate reversal of RVW is at best unrealistic and immature. If you plant a tomato seed today and tomorrow pout over no tomatoes implies that God himself is not speedy enough and needs to improve. This level of hypervigilance, embodies the dysfunctional expectation of an entire crowd of grumblers that will never be satisfied by even God.

In Love

wwwo