Gallup Poll: Blacks Basically the Same as Republicans on Moral Issues

According to this Gallop poll, African-Americans are basically social
conservatives, who are very much in line with the GOP on many moral
issues. I wouldn't be surprised to find similar results if the same poll was
taken with Hispanic respondents instead. This is why Democrats try to
be evasive with moral issues like gay marriage and abortion. Remember
this:



Columnists like Kathleen Parker absolutely make no sense when they call
for the GOP to get rid of the social cons. We live in a diverse country and if
the GOP wants to win elections they have to make inroads with minority
voters. And right now it seems the issues that minority voters and the GOP
agree on are the social issues. So asking the GOP to abandon social conservatives
is not being politically adept.

Pro-Life Message Goes Rap

New song from Nick Cannon with a pro-life message:



The song has a good message. It deals with responsibility and abortion. I
think there is one pro-choicers and pro-lifers should be able to agree that it's
becoming more of an irresponsibility issue. The vast number of abortions
performed in America aren't performed on incest or rape victims or even
women whose health is in jeopardy if they don't abort. So how do we encourage
women make more responsible decisions instead of arguing about the issue?

Another thing I noticed is that Nick Cannon and Tatyana Ali are Barack
Obama supporters, who is pro-choice. I've always seen abortion as a societal
and moral issue and not something that will be resolved in Washington D.C.
A song like this might be able to spread the pro-life message more than any
politician. Actually, I find it ironic that here's an instance that an entertainer
might be more socially conservative than a politico. Although, I (personally)
find it difficult to support a politician to who is pro-choice.

What's Love Gotta Do With It?

The Dems just don't get it, do they:

Later Tuesday evening, at a fundraiser across town, Biden
continued to focus on religion, accusing Republican nominee
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., of hating, but embracing, the
religious right.

"The only place John has changed is with regard to the
religious right, which he hates but he's embraced," Biden said
to supporters at a Democratic Victory Fund event hosted by
the American Association of Justice. "That's the only change
with John. The only change."

The political and religious right doesn't support Republican candidates because
they feel embraced or loved by them. It's because they share the same stances
on issues. It's a matter of shared values not emotion. The religious right would
rather support an unbeliever who's pro-life and for traditional marriage than a
fervent believer who is pro-choice. They make a mistake thinking that evangelicals
solely liked George Bush because he referred to himself as a "born again" Christian
or Ronald Reagan because he often used religious language in his speeches. It is
obviously more than that.

Sen. Obama has actively seeked the evangelical vote this year. He will probably
do well among young evangelicals but I doubt he will make any big inroads. The
problem isn't that Democrats haven't reached out to religious people enough,
as some seem to think. The problem is that Democrats are wrong on the issues
they most care about. Sen. Biden may very well be right that John McCain hates
the religious right. However, when it comes to the social issues the religious right
has found an ally in John McCain. Sometimes when you need to get things done
you partner up with people who don't like you very much. It's nothing personal.

Life

Born Alive

This shouldn't even be an issue, it should be something pro-lifers
and pro-choicers should agree with:

Women Issues

Since Governor Palin was selected as Sen. McCain's Vice-President
pick there's been much talk about among the chattering media if
she would attract women to the McCain ticket? Well it appears the
answer to the question seems to be: Yes!

For a long time women voters have been reliably in the Democrat
camp. Although, President Bush was able to make significant gains
in 2004 with what the media called "security moms." Until the Gov.
Palin pick I was extremely doubtful that Sen. McCain could keep the
2004 Bush gains, even with a large number of disgruntled Hillary
supporters out there. This opinion piece might help explain why
women largely vote Democrat.

I've heard Democrats argue that women shouldn't vote for the
McCain/Palin ticket because they are wrong on "women issues."
First, I want to know exactly what "women issues" are? Are they
referring to the abortion issue? Let me talk some about the abortion
issue. Plenty of women, like Gov. Sarah Palin, don't view the abortion
issue as a women's issue but a life issue. Hopefully with more pro-life
women in the national scene the country will finally see that the
debate has been framed wrong by our media. To be pro-life is often
portrayed as being anti-women, religious zealot, and backwards. You
can be a strong woman and say abortion is morally wrong. People
without strong religious convictions can say that abortion is morally
wrong. Educated and smart people can say that abortion is morally
wrong.

If you noticed the media is now trying to portray Gov. Palin as a
religious zealot. It behooves them to make her pro-life beliefs that
stem from her religious convictions as fringe. If they don't box her
into in the religious fringe category they fear that they might have
a strong, successful woman make an articulate case for being pro-life.
Sure there are plenty of socially conservative politicians who are
pro-life. However, how many of them are women? You can dismiss a
man's argument for being pro-life by saying, "Well, he's a man he just
doesn't know what women go through." That technique doesn't work
so well when you are talking to woman. So the media is going to do
everything it can to make the governor seem like a dumb, mindless,
unsophisticated religious nut case. They have to, they have no choice.
The stakes are too high for them.

Most Americans want to keep abortion legal, however, they are
increasing becoming more comfortable with putting regulations on
it. Quote from AP article:

You have this very stable support for a principle, but a willingness
to limit it in lots of circumstances over the last decade,” said Robert
Blendon, professor of health policy and political analysis at Harvard’s
School of Public Health.

So limiting abortion is not so scary anymore to the public. I sense a
fear from the cultural left that they are slowly losing ground on the
abortion and with every generation that passes they will continue to
do so. Once women started saying, "Enough with abortion!" Their
main argument is gone. That's why pro-life women must held in the
shadows. That is the central reason why the Sarah Palin pick has
brought so much anger and smears from the left, even from women.
Take, for example, this excerpt from an opinion piece by Wendy
Doniger on Gov. Palin:

Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman. The
Republican party's cynical calculation that because she has a womb
and makes lots and lots of babies (and drives them to school! wow!)
she speaks for the women of America, and will capture their hearts
and their votes, has driven thousands of real women to take to their
computers in outrage. She does not speak for women; she has no
sympathy for the problems of other women, particularly working
class women.

You see to people like Professor Doniger one can't be a women and have
conservative views. That's unthinkable.

Ok, now that have fleshed out the abortion part. I want to get back on
the questions of "women's issues." I asked what are women issues?
Women issues usually get categorized as abortion, health care, and
education by our media. Why must these be the labeled as solely
"women" issues? Why can't women vote on national security and
foreign policy? As if we don't care about what is going on overseas.

And shouldn't the very notion that women vote solely on domestic
issues upset feminist? Why should we can only be confined to
domestic issues especially in a national election? I can imagine
voting on something like education on a local and state level. Women
can't be fluent in foreign affairs. Also, women can agree with
conservative, free market solutions to health care and education.

We women are diverse. We have diverse opinions. We have diverse
backgrounds. Let's cherish that and not mock it.

Dobson on Obama: "He is dragging biblical understanding through the gutter."

Sen. Obama has clearly attempted to go after the evangelical vote. Well,
abortion is an issue many of them care about. Cue in James Dobson:

Dobson reserved some of his harshest criticism for Obama's
argument that the religiously motivated must frame debates
over issues like abortion not just in their own religion's terms
but in arguments accessible to all people.

He said Obama, who supports abortion rights, is trying to govern
by the "lowest common denominator of morality," labeling it "a
fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution."

"Am I required in a democracy to conform my efforts in the political
arena to his bloody notion of what is right with regard to the lives of
tiny babies?" Dobson said. "What he's trying to say here is unless
everybody agrees, we have no right to fight for what we believe."

Punishment

This was a poorly worded response by Sen. Obama:

"This is an example where good people can disagree," the Illinois
senator said. "The question then is, are there areas that we can agree
to that everybody can get behind? We can all agree that we want
to reduce teen pregnancies. We can all agree that we want to make
sure that adoption is a viable option."

The exchange appeared to be prompted by Obama's earlier comments
that he does not favor abstinence-only education, but rather comprehensive
sexual education that includes information on abstinence and birth
control.

"Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old," he said.
"I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they
make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby. I
don't want them punished with an STD at age 16, so it doesn't make
sense to not give them information."

Punished with a baby? Really? So you think that teenagers in American don't
know that one of the consequences of having unprotected sex is getting pregnant,
therefore, they shouldn't be 'punished'? I think people in prehistoric times could
probably put two and two together, sex = baby. And I'm sorry we live in the
information age, I'm tired of people saying it's a lack of education. When I read
about a well-off teenager like Jamie Lynn Spears (who has probably had the best
tutors around) is pregnant, I'm not buying the argument anymore.

I don't think having a baby is a punishment, it's being responsible for the life you
brought into the world.

Abortion Debate Gets Heated at Hillary Event

I spent hours waiting in line this afternoon to get into the Hillary Clinton campaign
event.
This was the most exciting part of my waiting:



Here's the card the priest featured in the video handed to me:



I think the most disturbing part of my day was when walking
to get back in line after this heated exchange I heard someone
say as I was passing by, "Priests are just a bunch of child molesters. "
Yep, that was my controversial day.

35th Anniversity of Roe v. Wade

Tomorrow will mark 35 years since Roe v. Wade decision was handed down.
Even decades after being passed it is still a volatile issue. I'm not confident
that we will ever overturn Roe v. Wade. The only thing that I'm positive about
when talking about abortion that if people want a change concerning this social
issue it has to come from the people. I always believe that societal change starts
from the people and then trickles down to our government. If the people outpour
that they do not want abortion legalized no longer than let it be so. If the people
want to keep things the way they are. Let it be so.

Today I read the blog of Father Jonathan Morris. Here is some of what he
had to say:

But what is never said by these same politicians — and I want
to say it clearly here, without any embarrassment — is that
government has not only the right, but also the obligation, to
interfere in the privacy of anyone who endangers the lives of
others, especially the lives of those who are unable to fend for
themselves. Our right to privacy — our right to anything, for
that matter — can only be properly understood in the context
of the competing rights of others.

Yes, I agree, there is good reason to fear a government’s tactics
of legislating morality but, if you want to know what’s really
scary, it’s a government that abandons its primordial role of
defending the life of the innocent against those with the power
and intention of extinguishing it.

A few days ago I read another article states the main factor for woman
who have abortions is financial concerns. Here are some stats:

Half of the roughly 1.2 million U.S. women who have abortions
each year are 25 or older. Only about 17% are teens. About 60%
have given birth to least one child prior to getting an abortion.

A disproportionately high number are black or Hispanic. And
regardless of race, high abortion rates are linked to hard times.

"It doesn't just happen to young people, it doesn't necessarily have
to do with irresponsibility," said Miriam Inocencio, president of
Planned Parenthood of Rhode Island. "Women face years and years
of reproductive life after they've completed their families, and they're
at risk of an unintended pregnancy that can create an economic
strain."

So I found commentary from a religious figure and Planned Parenthood
on the topic of abortion, not exactly the most dispassionate people. However,
they make their cases. Here is the written opinion of the Supreme Court
if you want to take a look at it.

Headlines 10-12-2007

Oh so many headlines today with so many controversial
issues.

Al Gore gets Nobel Peace Prize- Last weekend I saw a speech
by Bjorn Lomborg about his book "Cool It" on Book TV (I know
I'm need to get a life). He argues global warming is indeed occurring
but there are other humanitarian issues that should be higher priorities
because they save people right now. I know I'm probably over simplifying
his arguments but I like to keep these headlines snappy. " In the AP article
you will notice that Lomborg is quoted as stating, "Awarding it to Al Gore
cannot be seen as anything other than a political statement. Awarding
it to the IPCC is well-founded." Agreed.
One in 5 pregnancies worldwide ends in abortion- "Of the 41.6 million abortions
worldwide, 35 million were in the developing countries, and 6.6 million in
developed countries." The WHO study also found the legal status doesn't
deter abortions from occurring.
Atheists radio show goes national- Because really we haven't heard enough
of the atheists' voices in our media. Not in the book publishing world (see
Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Julia
Sweeny). There's no atheist talk show pundit (um, Bill Maher). There's no
fictional character's that are atheists in television (see House and Bones).
Oh so underrepresented really.
Let the flip-flopping allegations begin!- And we haven't had a primary yet!

One issue voting

Yesterday James Dobson had a piece in The New Yorks Times
basically saying that if the major parties don't nominate a pro-life
candidate he is going to take his vote elsewhere. Also, yesterday Log
Cabin Republicans, a group more moderate in social issues, put out this
yesterday:



It perplexes me how abortion keeps on being such an important
issue in elections. I will quickly disclose my personal views on
abortion. I use to be a strong pro-lifer but not so much anymore. I still
believe abortion is immoral but I don't think it should be illegal. I don't want
us to go back to when abortions were done in unsafe conditions. Ironically,
I don't think the conservative judges in the Supreme Court want that to
happen either.

Many evangelicals, like Dobson, will absolutely not vote for a pro-choice
candidate. Understandably, they feel passionate about the issue. It seems
like you can't have a dispassionate view on abortion these days. However,
I maintain that it is not wise to be a single issue voter especially on a issue
that is not likely to change any time soon.

I want a president who is strong on terrorism and stands for fiscal responsibility.
These are dangerous times and I want a president who can deal with national
security issues most importantly. There are other social issues Christians should
also be concerned about besides abortion. Poverty and injustice are dealt with in
the Bible too. Where's the moral outrage on those issues? We can't be selective.

Going somewhat off topic for a while. Sarah Silverman believes abortion is
funny (hat tip: Hotair). Look at this:



I'll repeat what I sarcastically wrote on Hotair: I’ve noticed lately
women comics are making more abortion jokes. You know like Carlos
Mencia talks about race. Well, now women comics have to add an abortion
joke to their repertoire so when VH1 does a special on them they can say,
“I not only did jokes but I did social commentary.” I makes the silliness they
are doing seem more important. Thanks, Sarah Silverman, for your
enlightening social commentary. Here is another unfunny abortion
joke example from network television:

Amy Schumer Last Comic Standing

Add to My Profile | More Videos

Ok, wow, I made it through my first complete 'abortion' post. Hope no one
is offended.

With the touch of the hand

In this episode of House, the creepy
doctor gets touched by the fetus he
is about to operate on. Earlier in the
episode he refused to call the unborn
child a baby and insisted it was only
a fetus.