"I don't want to vote for McCain and I won't vote for Obama." That's the little phrase I've come up with to explain my feelings about this election. I'm happy with either candidate.Allow me to preface this post: this is going to be extremely personal and emotional. It will touch deeply on my personal beliefs as well as my political stance on some sensitive issues. While I will cite doctrine from my church, which I testify is true, the conclusions I come to about those doctrines are my own, not necessarily those of the Church.
That being said, Obama is probably the walking definition of charismatic. When I've listened to some of his speeches I admit do feel inspired and feel like he would be an excellent leader. Despite these things, I still wouldn't vote for Obama. Here's why:
Obama supports not only abortion, but partial-birth abortion. In fact, he even made a speech in favor of post-birth "abortion". (You can read his full speech in chapter 10 of The Case Against Barack Obama by David Freddoso.)
Obama also wants to redefine the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman and voted against a federal amendment to ban same-sex marriage.
Now, one might ask why I put so much emphasis on these two topics when there are other very important things to consider including the war in Iraq, health care, energy issues, the economy, etc.. It's because of The Family: A Proclamation to the World which was given by God through his prophet. I hold it in the same reverence as I do the Bible, Book of Mormon, and other scripture.
In the Proclamation it states (in part - see the above link for the full document):
We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children....
We warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.Note that it doesn't say high taxes, outrageous government spending, wars, or lack of health care will bring upon us calamities. The disintegration of the family will. I don't consider those idle words, nor do I think they're figurative.
We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.
Which candidate "promotes [the] measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society"? It's not Obama. And while that's not the only factor to consider when casting your vote, I believe it's the most important.
Amen! Well worded my friend! I couldn't agree more! I personally don't understand the whole same-sex marriage thing. This is the best analogy I could think of to explain why I don't understand:
ReplyDelete1= man
2= woman
3= marriage
Okay so 1+2=3. End of story. I don't understand how you can say 1+1=3 or 2+2=3. Duh! (oh and women are 2 and men are 1 because women are worth more...haha just kidding!)
Fair enough, and I appreciate you sharing. I just think it's unfortunate that people make decisions based on radical anti-candidate books written to rile up their party of choice and sell copies. Like in "The Case Against Barack Obama".
ReplyDeleteObama actually responds to this smear on this site:
http://fightthesmears.com/articles/15/wildaccusations
This is not to say that Obama / Democrats don't have a different stance on abortion. But the fact is, most democrats in Utah actually vote exactly with the LDS church's postion, "in the rare cases where, in the opinion of competent medical counsel, the life or good health of the mother is seriously endangered or where the pregnancy was caused by rape and produces serious emotional trauma in the mother." But it's the extremists on the right wing that try to take the issue much further and take away ALL rights.
Very well stated, Dave. Here's to hoping that Jeremy Williams becomes president!
ReplyDeleteThe Family Proclamation is what I based my votes on as well. Amen.
ReplyDeleteThanks everyone for your comments.
ReplyDelete@Paul - As for the source of the information, a Washington Post article also reported:
"But Obama's record on abortion is extreme. He opposed the ban on partial-birth abortion -- a practice a fellow Democrat, the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, once called "too close to infanticide." Obama strongly criticized the Supreme Court decision upholding the partial-birth ban. In the Illinois state Senate, he opposed a bill similar to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which prevents the killing of infants mistakenly left alive by abortion. And now Obama has oddly claimed that he would not want his daughters to be "punished with a baby" because of a crisis pregnancy -- hardly a welcoming attitude toward new life."
The article can be found here: http://snurl.com/546w9
Regarding Paul's comment, it’s intriguing how he exposes his own hypocrisy. He characterizes "The Case Against Barack Obama" in the genre of "radical anti-candidate books" and immediately proceeds to characterize anyone who doesn't see the abortion issue through the filter of his eyes as "extremists on the right wing that try to take the issue much further and take away ALL rights".
ReplyDeleteReally? It's intriguing how he is so eager to perpetuate his own hate speech while trying to silence those he apposes.
Barack Obama has clearly demonstrated the depth and breadth of his embracing and lasting relationships with racists, socialists, Marxists and other radicals. The record is clear and documented.
The irony of the Abortion debate from the perspective of pro-death advocates is the reckless disregard for intelligent thought and for human life. Pro-choice as a moniker is a blatant distortion of agenda.
The abortion debate is in fact about choice. It is about the choice that women have to be sexually active. Once that choice is made and pregnancy results the consequence of the choice is then what really matters. Abortion is a reckless destruction of life. It is aggressively promoted to selfishly exonerate individual responsibility from previous choices. It is a brutal act, which destroys innocent life and is ultimately and disgustingly justified for convenience. Obama’s agenda documents justification to taking it to the very extremes.
Abortion propaganda uses expressions like “viable tissue mass” to numb people from really considering the long term consequences of their so called “choice”. The notion that a fetus, forcibly removed from a woman’s womb, is NOT human life is ludicrous. If the same fetus passes through the vaginal canal or by caesarean section, because it is “wanted”, then and only then is life to be valued?
People like me (who know, care for and have counseled women that have had abortions and are haunted by their “choice”) are label as right wing extremists who are trying to take away rights. You are correct that I personally would like the egregiously legal right to kill innocent babies to be eliminated. Are the vast majority of individuals who advocate protecting the sanctity of life really the extremists? Clearly they are not.
Abortion advocates whose consciences are so seared and whose hearts have are so hardened as to continue to justify this senseless and selfish brutality deny God and the sanctity of life. Their arguments are weak and unsustainable, and are perpetuated by name calling and distortions of fact, including Paul’s assertions and distortion of the LDS church’s position. I would suggest Paul read the entire article below from an apostle, respected physician and authorized spokesperson for the church. An open minded observer will see that Elder Nelson articulately and kindly portrays the position of the church and its members as anything but extremists.
http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=f318118dd536c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=d11d88c617b9c110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&hideNav=1
Just to clarify, I was not saying the position of the LDS Church was extreme, but that the members in Utah have tried to take a much stronger stance against all rights of a woman. For example, a couple years ago there was a bill proposed that would make it illegal for a doctor in Utah to perform an abortion under ANY circumstances.
ReplyDeleteAnd, the position I posted is copied from the mormon.org website and is also very similar to the statement on the article you referenced by Doug.
That is all. Doug is obviously a person I cannot find common ground with (pro-death???) and therefore not worth my time to respond to.