President Obama’s Brave New Ethics Stance: Anti-Life

By Robert Wallace
America’s Right

With the emerging controversy over President Barack Obama’s scheduled commencement address at renowned Catholic university Notre Dame, specifically complaints from students and bishops alike as to what could be perceived as the school’s tacit endorsement of an openly pro-Abortion president, conversations have once again turned to life and death in the wombs of America.

Abortion is one of the most contentious political issues in the United States. As a result of the highly charged emotional atmosphere of the debate, you can find extremists on both sides of the issue — from those who want to bomb abortion clinics to those who think infanticide should be legal up until several months after birth. So when I say that President Barack Obama stands out as the most extreme politician on life issues to ever hold national office I want that to sink in.

Even in an argument defined by controversy, he’s playing in a league of his own.

Those who followed Obama’s presidential campaign may think that I’m referring to his vote against the so-called Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (the federal or Illinois state version). And while it is true that his opposition to that bill amounted to support for infanticide and that he essentially lied to cover up his extremism, it turns out that President Obama intends to outdo Senator Obama with regard to matters of life.

During the press conference in which he announced his executive order to remove former President George W. Bush’s limits on embryonic stem cell research, Obama made these remarks:

“I am glad to see progress is being made in adult stem cells,” the president said. “And if the science determines that we can completely avoid a set of ethical questions or political disputes, then that’s great. I have — I have no investment in causing controversy. I’m happy to avoid it if that’s where the science leads us. But what I don’t want to do is predetermine this based on a very rigid ideological approach. And that’s what I think is reflected in the executive order that I signed.”

Noted commentator Charles Krauthammer (who is pro-choice, favors embryonic stem cell research, and by some accounts was invited to the ceremony by the White House) has already obliterated Obama’s frail pretext of ethical moderation and sophistication in a commentary piece entitled “Obama’s ‘Science’ Fiction”:

That part of the ceremony, watched from the safe distance of my office, made me uneasy. The other part — the ostentatious issuance of a memorandum on “restoring scientific integrity to government decision-making” — would have made me walk out.

Restoring? The implication, of course, is that while Obama is guided solely by science, Bush was driven by dogma, ideology and politics.

What an outrage. Bush’s nationally televised stem cell speech was the most morally serious address on medical ethics ever given by an American president. It was so scrupulous in presenting the best case for both his view and the contrary view that until the last few minutes, the listener had no idea where Bush would come out.

Obama’s address was morally unserious in the extreme. It was populated, as his didactic discourses always are, with a forest of straw men. Such as his admonition that we must resist the “false choice between sound science and moral values.” Yet, exactly 2 minutes and 12 seconds later he went on to declare that he would never open the door to the “use of cloning for human reproduction.”

For all of Krauthammer’s justified outrage, it’s not enough. (And I remind you, Krauthammer is pro-choice and favors embryonic stem cell research and even he finds Obama’s position to be abominable). He misses two key points. First of all, Obama did not ban cloning. His only requirement is that after you clone a human being you make sure to kill it before it develops beyond a certain point. Secondly–and more importantly–his pretext of allowing science to speak for itself was shattered by a subsequent executive order in which he overturned President Bush’s funding for alternatives to embryonic stem cell research.

The inventor of embryonic stem cell research–Dr. James Thomson–wrote that “if human embryonic stem cell research does not make you at least a little bit uncomfortable, you have not thought about it enough.” He then dedicated his research into efforts to find methods of deriving stem cells without destroying embryos. These methods–including altered nuclear transfer, regression–work with adult stem cells to induce them to behave more like embryonic stem cells, and the results have been promising. In fact, far more progress has been made in treating diseases with adult stem cells than with embryonic stem cells. The federal restriction on funding does not explain these results — it is due to the nature of embryonic versus other forms of stem cells.

This is textbook Obama. He calls a big conference and gives a condescending lecture in which he characterizes his opponents as ideologues and himself as the pragmatic voice of reason. Then, when the cameras are turned off, he hypocritically reneges on his own commitments and proves himself to be more ideological than even his straw man caricatures of his opponents!

On top of being hypocritical, there is no other word to describe Obama’s executive order other than “anti-life.” Why else would you not only open up funding for embryonic stem cells, but also discourage other forms of research that are even more promising?

Intelligent people can disagree about embryonic stem cell research. There is room for debate — as I would certainly debate Charles Krauthammer. But Obama’s position is beyond anything resembling reasonable. He wants unfettered scientific access to discarded and cloned human embryos with no restrictions at all, and yet he overturns federal funding for promising lines of research that could bring about cures without destroying human lives and without political controversy.

There’s no room for debate between intelligent people on that policy. It is indefensible.

—————
Robert Wallace has been writing for America’s Right since December 2008.

Share

Comments

  1. Gail B says:

    Why was Obama invited to speak at Notre Dame in the first place? If you lie with dogs, you get fleas.

    I would have thought that Notre Dame students would have opted for a speaker more in line with their own values and beliefs.

    Notre Dame should have prohibited Obama’s presence on campus, just as Obama agrees with California on prohibiting the presence of military recruiters on campus.

    As for Obama’s stand on anything positive for America, I can’t believe anything he says anyway. He talks out of both his faces.

    Robert, I haven’t had my coffee yet. It was 3 a.m. before I could go to sleep last night, after the jolt on the Service Act. However, in your article you analyzed the situation very well, as you always do.

  2. Laurie says:

    Mr. Wallace…..such a well written article, and I, for one, could not agree more. Thank you!!

  3. DR KILDARE says:

    They need to analyze some of Barry’s stem cells to figure out how he got so stupid.

    verification word: hiphoni
    Hawaiian for -foreign birth certificate on file-

  4. Gail B says:

    Dr. Kildare–

    You misread or misinterpreted hiphoni. It’s “Hi, Phony!” –as in “Well, hello, phony POTUS.”

    But my word to verify nailed me: dammers (At least we can have some fun here, along with the stomach-knotting stuff.)

  5. Anonymous says:

    Great article. This is the point on which I condem all professing Christians who voted for Obama, and whom I hold responsible for his election.

    Unfortunately, they used the argument of “moral equivalency” between such social issues as environmentalism or poverty and the destruction of life. They failed to understand that the creation of life was a once-in-a-universe occurence; God created it once and every life since is just a continuation of that one-time event.

    Life is God’s business, and it is not for us to interfere in the process of “creating” it, other than as participants in the natural process given (as in “gift”) to us by our Creator. Neither are we to ever, ever, destroy life to serve our own purposes or convenience (read “birth control”). It’s just another manifestation of the original sin – the desire for man to become “as God”.

    As for Obama, what can I say? Evil is as evil does.

    Old Bob

  6. suek says:

    Gail B…

    There was an article on this yesterday – I’ll try to find the link again. Apparently ND has had the practice in place for many years and through many presidents that invited presidents to have “open access” to the school. They are saying that they will not exclude this president regardless of his positions that disagree with theirs.

    There is considerable disagreement with him. As of yesterday, some 120 thousand plus people had signed a petition asking him to retract the invitation.

    At the very least, I hope that if the invitation is not retracted, as many people as possible obtain tickets and simply walk out when Obama takes the podium.

    Heh. Wonder what he’ll do without his teleprompter…! Or will he bring one with him???

  7. suek says:

    And on the article….

    I agree absolutely.

    Obama’s position is totally illogical. Besides, science only tells us about things – it doesn’t tell us what to do about what we learn. Just because we _can_ doesn’t mean we _should_.

    If we could ever get access to Obama’s school records, we might learn how much science he’s taken. What do you want to be it would turn out to be _ZILCH_!

  8. Gail B says:

    1Timothy 6:10, King James Version:
    “For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.”

    It’s not money, but the LOVE of money, i.e., greed. And, that is the problem with Obots in wanting to “spread the wealth.”

  9. RoBoTech says:

    If Obama had ANY class at all, he would bow out after seeing the controversy and division.
    But, he has no class.
    In fact, he and the other Socialists are sitting back and laughing at the Catholics over the division. They love the turmoil as it divides people.
    And divided, they will fail.

    It really comes down to the ND President. It is time for him to step down, or be ousted. It was a BIG mistake in the first place. He should have floated the idea out to the Alumni.
    He just threw a bucket of poop in their faces.
    The ALUMNI gives the most in donations and support.
    Far lefties just laugh at ND donation efforts.

  10. Anonymous says:

    This is for you suek:

    JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN DOESN’T MEAN YOU SHOULD…

    Freedom of Speech
    You can burn the American Flag, but that doesn’t mean you should.
    You could as a government run organization subsidize and fund artists that create trash for artwork which contain racists’ comments about Caucasians, but that doesn’t mean you should.

    Illegal Immigration
    You could walk across the border from Mexico into the United States and be apprehended up to 6 times before you are arrested, but that doesn’t mean you should.

    Political Correctness
    You could print instructions or record voice mail prompts on any one of hundreds of alternate languages, but that doesn’t mean you should.

    Freedom of Religion
    You could remove God from the public square in your everyday activities, but that doesn’t mean you should.

    Voting
    You could vote for a representative to any office that will care more about the K street lobbyists and special interest groups than America’s best interest, but that doesn’t mean you should.

    Parenting
    You could buy your kid a pair of tennis shoes that cost $125 every six months just so he will like you, but that doesn’t mean you should.

    Commerce
    You could go on eBay and sell someone a bill of goods, but that doesn’t mean you should.
    You could steal Girl Scout cookies from the troop set up outside of your local Krogers and sell them on eBay, but that doesn’t mean you should.
    You could overlook a decent American in order to not pay him/her a decent wage and hire an illegal immigrant instead, but that doesn’t mean you should.
    You could load your deli meat and pet food with garbage, but that doesn’t mean you should.

    Too Much TV
    You could sit in front of TV watching little league championship baseball games from 1973 on ESPN, but that doesn’t mean you should.

    Supreme Court
    You could fall asleep while on the bench as a Supreme Court Justice, but that doesn’t mean you should.

    Pixel Patriot

  11. Gail B says:

    I keep seeing the ad over to the right with the picture of O and the question, “Do you regret voting for Obama?”

    I didn’t vote for him, but his mother would have done much better to have instead kept the stork that brought him.

    Sue K–I’ll check back for the link you mentioned. And, thanks.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Obama uses pseudo-science and crony socialism to enrich himself and his political cronies.

    Any bum can do that but it takes a civilized human being to make positive contributions to society.

    Intelligent, hard-working and civilized men are able to find ethical solutions to human problems, stupid and foolish men panic and change the laws that they are too stupid or too corrupt to uphold.

    This will be Obama’s legacy: panicky, emotional and thoughtless reactions to everything that happens. Shortsighted, money grubbing fools will flock to him but their ship is sinking fast.

  13. goddessdivine says:

    I remember reading that piece written by Krauthammer. While he supports stem-cell research, he only favors it to the extent of including spare embryos not used by clinics. (Your post makes it seem like he supports it 100%; he doesn’t.)

    I personally oppose embryonic stem-cell research. It’s a moral issue that shows a devaluation of life. Obama proves once again he is anti-life. It’s despicable. Even more deplorable is his stance on abortion. Anyone who would leave babies to die from a botched abortion is sick.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Oh well, if Soetoro is allowed to attend maybe he can give a speech on global warming (big grin)…

    Island Turtle has more:

    President Obama declared the Red River floods in North Dakota and Minnesota a wake up call to take global warming seriously. As with most global warming alarmists, he opened his mouth before checking the facts. In reality North Dakota and Minnesota, the sources of the Red River, had a much colder than normal winter (Dec-Feb). For North Dakota it was the 18th coldest and for Minnesota the 19th coldest in the past 114 years.

  15. Anonymous says:

    Follow the money. He’s for embryonic stem cell research for the same reason that the researchers are: they can patent the cell lines and make a lot of money.

    Adult stem cells will probably result in one-time cures–for the person who donated the cells. That person will own his cells. That person will benefit from the cure based upon his own DNA. In actuality, adult stem cell research will result (if all goes well) with better cures, because the cells will be a perfect match for the recipient.

    Besides which, for virulent anti-life, “pro-choice” people, they will support ANYTHING that aligns with and furthers the belief that an embryo is not a person.

  16. Robert Wallace says:

    @ goddessdivine

    I’m sorry if my post misrepresented Krauthammer’s position. I do know that he only favors it for embryos which have already been discarded. (I oppose it even in those cases.) I thought that’s what I had conveyed, but it wasn’t the central point of my essay and I may not have been clear.

  17. Anonymous says:

    Is there any rule that says you MUST go to commencement in order to get your diploma? It is just a milestone that seems important at the time. Kind of like when did you learn to pee in the toilet? In 20 years it won’t matter.

  18. suek says:

    This isn’t the one I read before, but it’s ND’s site, and does have the info about past presidents.

    Notre Dame site

  19. tm says:

    What would he actually say to a catholic college
    Late term abortion?
    stem cell research?
    hate for anyone who disagrees with him?
    arrogance in his world?
    His discord for judeo christian values?
    His disrespect of humanity?
    His disprespect of elderly?
    His disrespect of the military?
    his hate of america and capitalism
    or maybe how he just bumped Jesus they should idolize him? it’s apsurd.
    It’s unfathomable that he would have been asked to give a speech in a catholic college in the first place.
    and someone tell me when was the last time this man was ever to any church other then that hate one?
    He’s a muslim and detests all christians.
    I am catholic – I don’t want him there.

  20. Rev. Donald Spitz says:

    I’m not a Catholic and I don’t want him there either.

  21. Claudia says:

    WAY TO GO GEORGIA!!!!
    Georgia VOTE in their Grand Jury today at 4:15 PM to Indict Mr. Obama. Now he has to abide by the Presentments that are too be demanded. STEP ONE. Next Grand Jury is in Texas.

  22. Anonymous says:

    @ Anonymous/Island Turtle-

    Apparently O still has work to do on slowing the rising of the oceans.

    @suek-

    For further insight on the Notre Dame question, see Guarded Opinion at:

    http://baracksteleprompter.blogspot
    .com/

    Jeff,
    The teleprompter blog is outstanding. Thanks for the heads up.

    By the middle of last week it already had 19,000+ hits, just a few days after its intro. Today,
    50,000+ hits, and rising fast. Just what we needed in the midst of all the awful news. Great site!

    bebe

Speak Your Mind

*