<p>
</p>
<p>Hunt, it’s going to be a long summer, I think, in this regard. And the conservatives are feeling ever more demoralized… </p>
<p>[Poll:</a> Fired-up factor favors Obama - CNN.com](<a href=“http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/17/morale.poll/index.html]Poll:”>Poll: Fired-up factor favors Obama - CNN.com)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe I heard (or read) that Obama’s former church was pro-choice, and pro-gay rights— both, positions that fly in the face of many traditional Christian churches. If this is true, I see no contradiction in Obama’s stand.</p>
<p>Never mind, I posted the above before I became aware of Owlice’s well researched post. No. 40.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, I am fired up partly because Obama is smart enough to answer back to Rove/McCain attacks as they should be answered: I can’t believe the man who is such a champion of the Iraq debacle is trying to school Obama on being competent, prepared, and strong. The good news is Obama didn’t let him get away with it:</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-confidential-cafe/524964-obama-gop-not-credible-terror.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-confidential-cafe/524964-obama-gop-not-credible-terror.html</a></p>
<p>Owlice thanks for the link. All I can say is wow. I had read about, but not done any real reasearch on this church and some of it’s origins and doctrinal beliefs. Given the stances they appear to take, I can see why he worshiped as long as he did, and how there wouldn’t be a conflict with his beliefs.</p>
<p>I think everyone knows deadbeat dads suck. It’s not like Obama took a controversial position. Are we really to the point where someone gets praised for talking common sense? Is that how pathetic we are?</p>
<p>I really would have preferred a position where someone actually attempts to create stigma within the African American community for having children out of wedlock.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>poetsheart - please forgive me if this comes across as trying to hijack the thread, but I had an awakening this weekend that surprised me greatly. I attended an all girl’s Catholic high school, and had my reunion this weekend. We graduated 106 girls in 1978. A couple of them are on staff there, now (have been for a long time) and shared some interesting things. The school (now around 800 students) has three Muslim students attending; they have also provided prayer mats for them in the school’s chapel. The school also has several openly gay teachers - they welcome their partners and their children at all faculty/staff functions, as well as provide health insurance for them. </p>
<p>The turn around in this school began not long after I graduated, and can be solely attributed to a wonderful nun who became the principal. She has done outstanding things in the school. It sure ain’t the Catholic world I grew up in.</p>
<p>I told my brother (who attended an all boys school across town) about it, and he wondered ‘how she got away with it’. I was told she has taken lots of heat for her decisions, but has held true to her believes of inclusion. </p>
<p>How 'bout them apples for progress? (yea, I know… some won’t see it as progress)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Except that people like you, people who proudly call themselves “conservative”, have been busting the chops of black leaders for years, condemning them for neglecting to address issues like unwed mothers, and absentee fathers within the AfAm community. </p>
<p>So what is it then? When they say nothing (or, as is more likely the case, you don’t hear them when they do—for they do indeed address this issue in black churches regularly), you condemn them for failing to speak out. And when they do boldly address the issue, you now declare that it’s no big deal. So, in essence, you can’t be pleased either way.</p>
<p>Why am I not surprised?</p>
<p>I really would have preferred a position where someone actually attempts to create stigma within the African American community for having children out of wedlock.
Pro choice then?</p>
<p>( and what does a ceremony have to do with being responsible and mature enough to take on the responsibility of providing for and raising a child for almost two decades?)</p>
<p>
That’s funny, I saw my post as more of a criticism of the mainstream media (and ultimately ourselves) for hooking onto a virtually meaningless sound bite.</p>
<p>And I’m not conservative (as if that actually has meaning anymore), I’m Libertarian.</p>
<p><a href=“and%20what%20does%20a%20ceremony%20have%20to%20do%20with%20being%20responsible%20and%20mature%20enough%20to%20take%20on%20the%20responsibility%20of%20providing%20for%20and%20raising%20a%20child%20for%20almost%20two%20decades?”>quote</a>
[/quote]
I don’t know how/why marriage has to do with anything. I’m just responding to the data.</p>
<p>And yes, I’m pro-Choice. Better to abort than bring in a child to an unwed family.</p>
<p><a href=“and%20what%20does%20a%20ceremony%20have%20to%20do%20with%20being%20responsible%20and%20mature%20enough%20to%20take%20on%20the%20responsibility%20of%20providing%20for%20and%20raising%20a%20child%20for%20almost%20two%20decades?”>quote</a>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>One the chief problems that Obama was addressing in his speech was the breakdown of the Black family. One only has to look at the 70% of kids born to unwed mothers in the AA community and observe the accelerated downward trends in the AA community since the 50’s. No ceremony, no compulsion to be committed, no stigmatization of children out of wedlock and you see what has happened and is happening. So much for this social experiment. One not need to be a sociologist to see the correlation and causation in part when individuals deviate from the institution of marriage. It’s more than about attempting to collect money from non custodial parents. It’s much bigger than that. I would imagine that had Michelle and Barack not gone through the “traditional” ceremony of marriage, would he be just as viable a Presidential candidate as he is now?</p>
<p>I think not. </p>
<p>Given his fatherless background, his actions speak a lot more than his politically correct words.
When it comes to raising a family outside of the traditional family unit as we know it, there have been exceptions to the rule of course, but they are what they are… the exceptions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I know it’s anecdotal, but tonite I have spent several hours consoling a friend who made that decision several months ago. Going through some tough times personally she is. Painfully reflecting on her decision, I would venture to say, she has yet to agree with your perspective.</p>
<p>“I’ve wondered to myself until this post, how could Obama reconcile his faith, in which he states his allegiance to the “Church and Christ”, and yet take a pro choice position and accept endorsements from Planned Parenthood and other pro-choice advocates?”</p>
<p>This is a huge dilemma for many Christians, and they resolve it different ways. Some of them feel so strongly about the abortion issue, that they will not vote for a pro-choice candidate, no matter what. Others look at a broader range of issues and try to make the best overall decision they can. In other words, it’s possible for a Christian to disagree with a candidate on abortion, but vote for him anyway because of the weight of all the issues. I’m hoping that Obama will recognize that there are plenty of people in this boat, and that he will try to have an actual discussion of the issue that gives that viewpoint respect.</p>
<p>Again, though, Hunt, you are assuming that pro-choice is a priori not a Christian position. Though many individuals and denominations may believe that, others simply do not. For many, there is nothing to resolve.</p>
<p>(Note: this is not to reference my own position, which I don’t intend to get into now, just a statement of fact.)</p>
<p>This is my problem: I don’t think there should be an easy answer to this particular issue for anybody, Christian or not. It should be hard to resolve, because there are important values on both sides, and if you are a Christian of any stripe, your beliefs get mixed up in those values. This is why I don’t it when politicians demonize the other side on this issue.</p>
<p>I agree (my position itself is very complex.) but is Obama demonizing on this? (SIncere question; it’s not an issue I’ve examined him on.)</p>
<p>No, I don’t think so. I was actually thinking about Gore, back when he was running. There were a lot of things I liked about him (and I voted for him), but I felt shut out by his statements on this issue. Obama has (so far) been pretty smart about things like this, and although I expect him to be clearly pro-choice, I also expect him to recognize that the issue is difficult for many people.</p>
<p>“It should be hard to resolve”</p>
<p>I agree that it should be hard to resolve as a personal ethical question.</p>
<p>But the question of whether the government ought to impose one answer on everyone is a very easy one for me.</p>
<p>I don’t think even that is easy for somebody struggling with the issue of whether abortion is essentially the same as infanticide. If you resolve that issue one way, then I agree that your position flows from it. But the underlying issue isn’t easy.</p>