The discussion dwelt at some length on abortion. Obama said he earnestly wants to "discourage" the practice—despite the distortions of some who think if they affix the "pro-abortion—won't overturn-Roe-label" to the senator, pro-lifers like myself won't give him the time of day. Sorry, good friends, not this year.Spare me. He wants to reduce the incidence of abortion by making it illegal to place any constraints on it whatever. This is what it means to support (as Obama emphatically does) the Freedom of Choice Act which, as I pointed out at length here, will undo such consensus as this country has already reached on the matter, overruling 70% of the American people, the Congress, the President & the Supreme Court on such matters as the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban, informed consent, parental consent and conscience shield laws.
Not to understand that there is more than one rather indirect and elusive judicial way to address an intrinsic evil understates the ingenuity of the devout. Describing the abortion decision as a "difficult, deeply moral one," Obama sees it as one only the woman can make. Unless her choice affirms life that is not my Catholic view, and I told him so. But disagreement or not, it is abundantly clear from our conversation that Obama shares a common aspiration to reduce the incidence of abortion.
Moreover, speaking as a former pro-life lobbyist who know most of the players personally --is there a serious activist in these matters who doesn't understand that the ultimate victory will be a cultural one --that hearts change before laws do? Does Prof. Kmiec thinks he discovered that idea? All those measures passed federally and in the states passed precisely because pro-lifers did the hard work of convincing their neighbors and winning the votes to change the law --and the culture. More Americans now identify as pro-life than pro-choice, an important difference between today and 30 years ago. Kmiec is supporting a candidate and a policy who wants to take us not forward toward consensus, but backwards --away from the consensus that's already been achieved. He was on better ground from a Catholic point of view when he was arguing the war trumps abortion in this instance. That case can be made legitimately (not prudently in my view, but legitimately). The idea that Obama can be his choice (sorry) on pro-life grounds is absurd.
Tangentially: American Digest noted something interesting in Mr. Obama's Father's Day speech.
Just asking: If Obama believes,
"We need fathers to recognize that responsibility doesn't just end at conception." [Obama's Father's Day Message ]does he also then believe that human life begins at conception?
