ÐHwww.dakotavoice.com/2008/08/human-rights-above-obamas-pay-grade.htmlC:/Documents and Settings/Bob Ellis/My Documents/Websites/Dakota Voice Blog 20081230/www.dakotavoice.com/2008/08/human-rights-above-obamas-pay-grade.htmldelayedwww.dakotavoice.com/\sck.cg3xíR[IÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÈ j[OKtext/htmlUTF-8gzip (àj[ÿÿÿÿJ}/yWed, 31 Dec 2008 09:15:23 GMT"d535d317-f59f-44fb-a962-f2fd2b83e6af"f3Mozilla/4.5 (compatible; HTTrack 3.0x; Windows 98)en, en, *êR[IÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿFoj[ Dakota Voice: Human Rights Above Obama's Pay Grade

Featured Article

The Gods of Liberalism Revisited

 

The lie hasn't changed, and we still fall for it as easily as ever.  But how can we escape the snare?

 

READ ABOUT IT...

Sunday, August 17, 2008

Human Rights Above Obama's Pay Grade

From Reuters, Barack Obama confesses what is common sense for most people is beyond him.

During the Saddleback Civil Forum, Obama was asked about when an unborn child goes beyond being an inanimate blob of tissue to being human:

Asked at what point a baby gets “human rights,” Obama, who strongly supports abortion rights, said: “… whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity … is above my pay grade.”

Perhaps Obama should just talk to some scientists about human development or maybe read a book. He might learn that from the moment of conception, the unborn child has human DNA which is complete in its programming and unique from every other human being in the world, including the child's mother.

Obama's statement that he doesn't know when an unborn child is "human enough" to deserve human rights is a cop out. He knows that he can't admit in front of a public audience that he believes that if we don't want the child, it doesn't even deserve human rights after it's born.

That would have been his honest answer...


3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm sorry to disagree, but I think Obama was right on target. Obama is running for President of the United States, not chief pastor or philosopher or theologian. Americans of all stripes sharply disagree at what point between conception and birth a fetus should have full human rights. The President of the United States cannot, and should not, be the arbiter of such a personal and divisive moral dilemma.

Bob Ellis said...

How about the arbiter of murder, rape, theft, child abuse, education, et al?

Passing the buck on such a clear issue is just a cop out.

jett said...

Obama was not asked a theological question, he was asked about RIGHTS!!! As president of the U.S, it is his job to uphold the rights of the people. The right to free speech. The right to bare arms. the right to vote. With the Olympics in China right know, alot of people around the world are talking about human rights. Why can't Obama answer a simple question on when one gets "human rights." At some point, I assume we all attain that right at some point, when is a great question for anyone in government.

 
Clicky Web Analytics