Just got this gem from a conservative evangelical re: Abortion.

[GreenPartyVoter]

Is being president above Obama's pay grade?
Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - 9/4/2008 4:00:00 AMBookmark and Share

Barack Obama talkBarack Obama admitted recently that he isn't sure when life begins and said the question may be a little above his pay grade.

As a result of the statement, David O'Steen, executive director of the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), believes being president may be above Obama's pay grade, in light of a Zogby poll on the question of when life begins.

"The Zogby poll shows that 59 percent believes human life begins at conception, and only 17 percent erroneously says at birth," O'Steen explains.

In addition, O'Steen believes many people will not forget that Obama voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection bill, but he did so three times as an Illinois legislator and offered, in O'Steen's view, a questionable explanation.
baby ultrasound
"I think as his campaign has progressed more and more people have found out how extremely pro-abortion Barack Obama is," he adds.

O'Steen was asked if he believes voters will hold Obama's pro-abortion stance against him at the polls in November.

"Not only does this show how extreme he is that he would vote against legislation to protect children who survive abortion, but it also calls his veracity into question," O'Steen contends.

According to LifeNews.com, the Zogby survey posted a follow-up question, asking whether voters would oppose or support a presidential candidate who is not sure when life begins. The poll showed that voters, "by a 55.3-to-27.7 margin," would oppose such a candidate.

I replied, "I'll take Obama over Sarah Palin anyday. To deny abortions to women and girls for rape and incest is astonishing to me. Even more so since she has daughters of her own."

[Left Is Write]

1. The abortion debate shouldn't be about when life begins.

It should be about whether an unborn life has rights and if those rights trump those of a born woman.

The answer to both of those questions is NO.

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. Unfortunately, you'll be hard-pressed to find a RW evangelical who agrees with you

[Left Is Write]

5. I know. They never see shades of gray.

[tanyev]

6. I'd like to see the debate focus on how easy it is to prevent unwanted conceptions,

and how all the fundies' efforts are making things worse.

[Left Is Write]

8. Yes, of course - prevention is key.

But once a conception has occurred, the debate on "when does life begin" just muddies the waters.

[dbonds]

3. The can Choose life all they want, as long as there is a choice.

[margotb822]

4. If I can't tell you what to do with your testicles,

you better stay the hell away from my uterus.

It's about choice. End of story.

I refuse to have this discussion on any other grounds, as I believe we all should.

PS Why do Republicans feel so comfortable taking a fully developed life (ie the death penalty?). Hypocrite alert!

[GreenPartyVoter]

7. Ditto for killing off our soliders in an immoral war that was based on lies

[DavidDvorkin]

9. Define "life"

The real question is what a speaker means by life.

The sperm and egg cells are of course alive before they combine. The argument is clearly about some different kind of life that begins at some point after the sperm and egg combine. For religious people, the argument is really about when ensoulment happens. Put it in those terms, and it's clear how meaningless and theological the question really is. For the non-religious, it's an argument about when the fetus becomes a person, and about what we mean by person.

[niyad]

10. hey, jerk, NOBODY is "pro-abortion"--they are PRO-CHOICE

[GreenPartyVoter]

11. Well, you know how they like to frame things that way