Cranmer on Obama and Abortion

McCain might not be the perfect package, but as Cranmer rightly points out, at least he doesn’t vote in favour of infanticide.

Live birth abortion?

Senator Obama voted three times against a Bill which would have outlawed the evil of ‘live birth abortion’.

It is a termination process which involves the birth of a live baby, the issuing of a birth certificate, the purposeful abandoning of the baby to a slow and tortuous death, and the callous issuing of a death certificate.

Is this not infanticide?

By law, if an aborted baby is born alive, both birth and death certificates must be issued. Ironically, the cause of death often listed for live aborted babies is ‘extreme prematurity’, which amount to a confession by doctors that they have caused this death. It is not uncommon for a live aborted baby to linger for an hour or two or even longer. One baby is reported to have lived for almost an entire eight-hour shift. Many of these babies are born completely healthy, for they are terminated at 40 weeks for the ‘health’ of the mother, and also in cases of rape or incest. Ever since Doe v Bolton (the companion case to Roe v Wade) the United States Supreme Court has adopted the definition of the World Health Organisation for ‘health’, defined as ‘any condition that might impact her physical, emotional, psychological or financial well being’.

So live birth abortion is permitted in many US states up to nine months for emotional (can’t cope), psychological (don’t want to cope) or financial (can’t afford it) reasons, effectively extending abortion to on demand.

When the aborted baby is born alive, he or she (for the baby can no longer be an ‘it’) receives what is known as ‘comfort care’, during which the baby is kept warm in a blanket until he/she dies. Parents (for that is what they are) may hold the baby if they wish. If they do not want to hold their dying aborted baby, a staff member cares for the baby (if they have time) until he/she dies. If staff do not have time, the baby is simply abandoned to die a slow, lingering death.

Perversely, the evil of child-killing is given spiritual trappings, with the option of baptism for the child who is killed. Hospitals provide baptismal certificates and gowns, and even a first-photo machine to record the birth.

All of which is cynically designed to make the parents (and medical staff?) feel better about the murder.

Cranmer would genuinely like to know how any Jew, Christian or Muslim could vote for a man who not only privately supports this practice, but actively legislates for it. Pace Biden and Pelosi, how do all these ‘Catholics for Obama’ reconcile this manifest abomination with their Church’s teaching on the sanctity of life? According to the LA Times, no candidate in recent memory has entered the White House without securing a majority of the votes cast by Catholics, who now constitute 25 per cent of the population. Is the Catholic vote any longer Catholic?

17 Comments on “Cranmer on Obama and Abortion

  1. I would refer people to my previous post here.  Apparently Peter likes to be fair and judicious only when it suits his worldview.

  2. Tony,

    I’m being perfectly fair and judicious. Your previous comment is available for all to see and they can make their own mind up if you have a case or not or whether you are simply fudging the issue.

  3. Well, if you had shown any degree of understanding the political system here, and why so-called “pro-choicer’s” vote the way they do then perhaps I could believe you. But, as compared to your incredible and nuanced ways of approaching church polity and homosexuality, your posts on abortion are without merit. They are crude and bald assertions that abortion is a black and white issue, or at least how to handle the issue is black and white.

    Perhaps because you live somewhere else you fail to grasp that Republicans have held Evangelicals captive here for over twenty years, promising to do things about abortion, yet doing nothing. 7 out of 9 of our Supreme Court Justices have been appointed during “Pro-life” Presidency’s. Why isn’t Roe v Wade overturned then? Because all they want is our vote.

    The country in the world that has the lowest abortion rates? The Netherlands! For God’s sake the most ‘liberal’ country in the whole freakin world. Why? Because of good healthcare, education, and broad economic equality. Policies that affect education, healthcare, and poverty seem to me to be the best way’s to actually begin to reduce abortions. All three of which are poorly addressed by McCain. We around here can’t just hang all our hopes on Roe v Wade and hope the Republicans actually do something. And “doing” something is the key here, not someones “political position.” For the first time ever Obama has included plans to actaully reduce abortions into the Democratic Platform. McCain, he just gets the vote by saying that he is against abortion, but has no plan of action to do anything about it.

    Thank God you can’t vote here

  4. Thank you Tony Hunt for spelling out what many of us in this country thought to be the case. It has been truly worrying to see how some of the Christian ‘right’ over here have jumped on the McCain/Palin bandwagon (some on the basis of the abortion issue  alone, as Peter seems to do) without asking any questions about foreign policy, healthcare, education etc, not to mention questions about the death penalty and the war in the Middle East. As you say, thank goodness they don’t get to vote….  

  5. Tony,

    You have a particular bee in your bonnet about abortion.

    Ultimately the murder of babies IS a “black and white issue”. The murder of innocent infants is wrong and any Presidential candidate who says that they are in favour of it would get the same treatment from me, McCain, Palin, Biden, Nader or otherwise.

  6. Peter,

    The main reason I have mostly commented on your abortion posts is because I agree with most other things you say!

    I have plenty of other bees too, trust me. 

    And I also, again and for the record, despise abortion.  But I think there is a difference between voting for a candidate who shares my exact morals, and one who will potentially DO something, even if it is small, to begin to reduce abortions. 

    Again, it is said that Americans and Brittains are divided by a common language.  I would add culture.  “Pro-life” Presidency’s have done squat to halt abortions, Republicans have used Evangelicals for far too long just to stay in office, and there ARE other issues to which we need to draw attention.  That is all for me, nothing more and nothing less, as goes abortion anyway.

    Thanks, and keep writing

    Tony Hunt

    God Bless

  7.  Peter,
    As regards Cramner’s article, isn’t it generally accepted that MOST Catholics ignore (for example) the Church’s teaching on birth control?   Cramner’s apparent astonishment at pro-choice Catholics is disengenous.
    I would say that I am currently reassesing the abortion issue, however.

  8. Peter,

    What is your opinion about the legal position on abortion in the Republic of Ireland and the fact that this does not stop a large number of Irish women having abortions? I see abortion as a great moral evil but I’m at a loss to what we can do about it. It certainly doesn’t look like legislation solves the problem if Ireland is anything to go by.

  9. Ryan,

    If you’re a nominal Roman Catholic then yes, you will ignore the church’s teaching, but that problem isn’t limited to just abortion.


    The problem in Ireland isn’t that the Irish law is incorrect, it’s that UK clinics permit the Irish to come over here and have abortions. Were that to be impossible there would be far fewer abortions amongst Irish women.

  10. And Ryan, I’m going to suggest that Gagnon is near the mark on how revolutionary an Obama presidency alongside a Democratic Congress might actually be in terms of liberal social policy.

  11. Peter,

    I understand what you are saying but isn’t that exactly the problem? If the Americans, for the sake of argument, made abortion illegal, what would stop American women going to Canada (or wherever) in their droves to get theirs done? The experience with Ireland and the UK suggests that is what would happen. I would welcome legislation on moral principle alone but I don’t think we can be under any illusions that this would make the problem go away.

  12. Peter,

    I do not think that Obama will “liberalize” abortion, whatever that means. Besides, we are already “liberal” for the most part on this issue. Again, for me, there are more issues that relate directly to life and it’s protection than just abortion. I would also tend to agree with MattS, legislating this issue is not simple. This is not “my” country, this is the United States, I simply find it unChristlike to go about forcing my conscience upon an unwilling nation, not least when there are other ways of addressing the issue than putting our hope in the overturning of Roe v Wade. Addressing poverty, health care and education are things our citizens can all agree on, and they are three of the biggest helps when dealing with abortion. When Paul starts talking about Jesus in Phillipians he says that God has exalted Jesus because of his not-grasping for authority, rather emptying himself and serving, becoming lowly; that’s how I am going about it for now.

  13. Peter, I’m quite astonished by this sentence of yours: 

    “Surely if it’s a toss-up between McCain who will do nothing and Obama who will liberalise the law, the way to go is McCain?”

    Is the abortion issue the *only* thing that concerns you between the two of them? Aren’t issues of social policy, (justice) foreign policy, (peace) education and health (basic human needs and rights) significant factors in making a decision betweeen these candidates?  Are you really that narrow in your thinking?

  14.  Peter, if most Catholics disagree with a particular aspect of the church’s teaching are they still “nominal” catholics? I’d speculate that most parish priests wouldn’t call members of their congregation who use birth control as nominal catholics; haven’t most forms of Christianity had a tension between official teaching and lived experience on the ground?   The Gagnon article is a bit slippery, starting as it does by focusing on moral issues and saying that he won’t be telling Christians who to vote for, but ending in defending Reagan. Iran/Contra and a “We Die, They Do Nothing” AIDS policy are Christian? 

    And the best thing that can be said about Sarah Palin is that she shows that Paul might have had a point with that no women speaking in church stuff ;-).

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.