Election 2008: The Democrats and Abortion
Sunday September 21, 2008
If Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama hoped to reach out to Catholic voters by picking a Catholic as his running mate, he may have miscalculated in choosing Sen. Joseph Biden (D-DE). As I've discussed before, Senator Biden, while stating that he is "prepared to accept my church's view" that life begins at conception, has voted consistently to uphold abortion rights, with two notable exceptions: partial-birth abortion and federal funding for abortion.
Thirty-five years after Roe v. Wade, Senator Biden is perfectly in sync with the national Democratic Party. Senator Obama, however, has proved to be even more radically pro-abortion than the mainstream of his party.
What could Catholics expect on the question of abortion from an Obama-Biden administration? What have the two men voted for in the past, and what do they promise to do in the future? Find out in our special election profile, "Where Do Barack Obama and Joe Biden Stand on Abortion?"
(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)More on Election 2008:
- Joe Biden and Abortion
- Should Politicians Who Support Abortion Receive Communion?
- Catholics for Palin?
- The Republicans and Embryonic Stem-Cell Research
- The Democrats and Embryonic Stem-Cell Research
Perhaps we are looking at this problem the wrong way. Is the answer really to make abortion illegal? While this would definitely curtail the number of abortions, I would like to point out that the majority of abortions occur because of economic difficulties or conflicts with jobs and school. In improving our economy and developing certain policies, we may be able to greatly decrease the number of abortions.
It was found in a study that improving male employment opportunities helps decrease abortion. I have also read a wonderful book called “The Case for Marriage.” Perhaps some more work on decreasing divorce and supporting marriage would help in this regard as well?
Why is it that when every US politics and Catholicism are mentioned together, the only issues discussed are abortion and stem cell research? Are American Catholics expected to vote solely on these issues?
They are NOT Catholic, and should not be allowed to say they are one. Where are the Bishops and Priest. The D Dem. are against the Catholic Church.
Oh please. Can’t I get some kind of intelligent response to my comment?
Mary, yes, of course other issues are very important, especially this time, but abortion was brought up, so we are discussing it. I am Catholic and I do not support abortion. What are the social issues surrounding abortion?
Scott is supposed to have a Master’s degree in political theory. Maybe he has thought through this issue more carefully? I am predicting he will take the Republican view of simply making it illegal, though doing nothing policywise to support women who are in these situations.
I agree with you Carolyn. There are a ton of other issues that lead to women having abortions that should be dealt with first. It just angers me that I very rarely see any other issue brought up to Catholic voters besides abortion and stem cell research. Maybe if the other issues you speak of are dealt with, abortion would become an unused service.
Carolyn – I appreciate your comment and hope this response finds you well. Your thoughts on the topic reminded me of something I learned from a Professor of Political Science. According to him, “No one is ever ‘pro-abortion.’ No one really wants to deliberately kill anything. The question is whether one stands up for the woman’s right to choose or the fetus’s right to life.”
I think some people do mistake pro-choice proponents as flatly “for” abortions and therefore instinctively seek a legal ban against such practices. But, I personally do not think that anyone who realizes importance in the right to choose is automatically made a child-killer. I was very glad to hear your suggestions on alternative methods for reducing abortion as I am one of those people who value the same God-given gift of free will while also seeking hope that abortion rates are curtailed as much as possible. I am pro-choice but find it unfair to be branded as a child-killer by default as I would never actually abort a child if it belonged to me and on many occasions have I offered adoption as an alternative to others who have pondered the scenario or worse, have found themselves in it.
Also, you may be interested (or even shocked) to know that a study by the Barna Group found that Christians experienced higher divorce rates than atheists or agnostics. So, I do think there is much credence in your theory that that the root of the problem may be deeper than conventionally thought (i.e. economic, employment, and in the case of my divorce example, family issues).
Our goal is not to limit the rights of either side but to preserve them. I think your suggestion for batting alternative causes is a thoughtful and sound strategy that both sides of the aisle can cooperate on.
Chris, you may “value the same God-given gift of free will,” but you do not value it for Christian reasons. The Church teaches us that the reason to value free will is because it allows us to make moral choices, not just to make choices. Choice, in and of itself, may be good or it may be evil. It is only if we make moral choices that our free will redounds to our benefit.
When a woman exercises her “right to choose,” it means the death of a child. Period. That, as the Church has proclaimed from New Testament times on, is an intrinsically evil act. Even those theologians who argued that ensoulment occurred at some point after conception unanimously agreed that abortion was always wrong.
You write, “Our goal is not to limit the rights of either side but to preserve them.” Would you say the same if the Supreme Court were suddenly to discover a “right” to kill one’s child after birth? Would not those who might think it merely a “choice” to kill your four-year-old also “realize importance in the right to choose,” as you do with abortion?