From Life News:
Obama Criticized for Using Daughters to Promote Abortion
by Steven Ertelt
President Barack Obama is coming under criticism for invoking the names of his daughters to promote federal taxpayer funding for the Planned parenthood abortion business.
As LifeNews reported this week, Obama once again called for more taxpayer funding of the abortion business during a campaign speech in Portland.
“Mr. Romney wants to get rid of funding for Planned Parenthood. I think that’s a bad idea,” Obama said. “I’ve got two daughters. I want them to control their own health care choices.”
That’s not going over well with Daniel Allott, a writer at the conservative American Spectator publication, who also wrote about Obama’s speech.
“It’s probably not a coincidence that Obama mentioned Planned Parenthood just as it has come under fire in the wake of news of a woman dying from a botched abortion at a Planned Parenthood facility in Chicago last Friday, and after renewed calls by congressional Republicans for public hearings about the scandal-plagued abortion business,” he writes.
Allott points out that Obama has repeatedly used his daughters when it comes to controversial abortion and pro-life-related topics:
Obama invoked Malia and Sasha in March, when he explained why he had called Sandra Fluke after she was insulted by Rush Limbaugh. Fluke was the Georgetown Law School student and abortion activist who demanded at an unofficial congressional hearing that her friends receive free birth control from the Catholic institution. “The reason I called Ms. Fluke is because I thought about Malia and Sasha and one of the things that I want them to do as they get older is to engage in issues they care about,” Obama said.
On the 2008 campaign trail, Obama told an audience that he supported sex education that included information about contraception and abortion because, “I don’t want [my daughters] punished with a baby.”
In the past, Obama has declared candidates’ families “off limits” to the media and political opponents.
Obama employs a double standard when it comes to his own family and the political spotlight. That’s no example for his daughters to follow.
Loading ...
Good thing for Malia and Sasha that their mother didn’t feel she was being “punished with a baby” – but in fact was open to life.
MSM
President Obama does not reason as an American man.
He also noted his opinion on gay marriage “evolved” after discussing it with his daughters. If this weren’t such a tragic and bizarre statement it would almost be funny. It’s so ludicrous. This president has no high opinion of the reasoning power of anyone save himself. He seems to believe we are all as dumb as a bag of hammers.
Come to think of it, now that I see the typical comments in online newspaper sites these days, about gay rights, he may be on to something.
How much lower can he go? This is the most crucial election in decades. Please, I’m begging you, vote and make sure your friends and family vote. This president must not be re-elected.
Kathleen10: He believes he has the proof we are all as dumb as a bag of hammers: His presence in office.
Father, I am afraid that this is a ‘fail’ in ‘liberalism 101’. Have you not understood that Mr O is an honourable man, therefore when he uses his family, or makes personal attacks, he does so because he is sincere and honourable. All non-liberals are, by the tenets of ‘liberalism 101’ dishonourable, therefore they should not make personal attacks or use their families; indeed, they should do the decent thing and cease to exist.
As an example of how this administration can lie its way out of its own lies, this one takes some beating:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100172390/the-white-house-blunders-again-over-the-churchill-bust/
Don’t see what the ‘issue’ is here, and by that I mean… Obama being consistent with his pro-death stance to the extent he extends it to even his own potential grandchildren. Those already on the abortion bandwagon will just see this as further championing the ‘rights’ of women. This statement by him won’t really ahcnge anyone’s minds about him. Though it is sickening to see him and his administration continue to funnel millions of dollars to Planned Parenthood against the wishes of individual States and despite all the scandals. Obama is a mass killer through and through, and it’s no surprise he will even be willing to kill his own grandchildren to further his ideological ends.
In related news, this billboard controversy has it spot on.
http://www.infowars.com/billboard-compares-obama-to-suspected-shooter-holmes/
Great point wmeyer.
Moreover, given the sad state of public–and even Catholic–schools today, O may have a point. Of course, the libs have been overwhelmingly responsible for the destruction of education, through application of the theories of one of their heroes, John Dewey. The operation was a success: the patient died. Now they harvest the fruit.
It is incredible how he takes for granted the gifts he received from God, two healthy children. To continually use them for his own political advantage is an indication of who this man is and what he stands for. His lack of values, even when it comes to his family, astounds me. If nothing else, I hope the American people can see this about him.
Angie – in the eyes of the ‘true believers’, the O man can do nothing wrong. We can only hope that after the last four years, there are many fewer than there were.
So, he’s saying it will be fine with him if his daughters murder his grandchildren? That’s a nice family sentiment. I wonder what his grandchildren will think when this read his statements someday?
Well, Sissy, unless his daughters are (his words) ‘punished’ with a child, we;ll never know.
jessicahoff, that’s true. Maybe his daughters will get “lucky” and never be “punished” in that way! What a mindset; it’s hard to believe any father could think that way.
Personally I wish adult demonstrators on either side of the choice issue would keep their children out of it, that goes for President Obama and sidewalk protesters who put signs in their childrens’ hands that they could not possibly understand.
I’m sure this would never pass muster constitutionally but I have a wonderful fantasy that there would be a law that only people who are registered and who actually VOTE could take place in demonstrations.
On any sign of any issue I really hate it when parents tow their kids to a rally and force them to demonstrate alongside of them for or against things they don’t understand. It disgusts me.
And even as one who favors the re-election of the incumbent in the upcoming general election, I think our president goes too far when and if he uses his daughters to push an ideological agenda. But he’s hardly the first candidate to ever do so, consider Sarah Palin’s pandering, using her special needs child as a television prop at the 2008 RNC convention.
Same difference.
and still, there are cars parked outside the Parish Church I attend sporting “Obama 2012” stickers…
“And even as one who favors the re-election of the incumbent in the upcoming general election,”
It is inconceivable for me to understand how a priest of Almight God could “favor” a politician who has no problem with allowing a baby who is born alive during a “botched” abortion to die on a stainless steel shelf – much less post it on the internet.
Boggles. My. Mind.
You never fail to disappoint, Fr. Jim.
MSM
So, frjim4321, you are opposed to free speech for people who aren’t registered to vote? No First Amendment protections for those who aren’t registered? And you also opposed parents teaching their children to take part in the civic duty of every citizen – the duty to protest unjust laws? No First Amendment right to train up their children to defend what their religion teaches? Which other Amendments from our Bill of Rights do you oppose?
I wonder what he would have thought about his mother’s potential choice to abort him or to let him die on a table if the abortion did not work! Funny how libs get so blustered when presented with this choice. It is the same with redistribution of wealth, your wealth not his!
Midwest St. Michael: My daughter-in-law is a clinical psychologist, and she has told me about a personality type that she refers to as a “conversational arsonist”. That is an individual who takes perverse pleasure in throwing out conversational firebombs, and then sits back chuckling as he watches the outrage he has provoked. I suspect “frjim4321” makes outrageous comments just to get a reaction. I agree with you; it seems impossible that an actual priest could be supporting a man who endorses infanticide.
frjim4321 says:
Personally I wish adult demonstrators on either side of the choice issue . . .
Choice? It is “the abortion issue”. All moral questions concern choice. The pagan Roman practice of the father being able to decide whether to expose the infant was a choice issue. The Nazi decision to have death camps was a choice issue. The South’s pro slavery policy was a choice issue.
By letting the pro abortionists dictate the terms of the discussion, you have all but accepted their conclusion.
Nicole . . . me too but it is magnetic and I removed it for funerals and other official biz.
MSM . . . b/c I really don’t think Romney is essentially any different in this regard.
Sissy . . . I prefaced the comment that it was a non-constitutional fantasy, and that I just hate it when parents force their unknowing children to agree with them publicly . . .
B0b . . . correct, it is about choice.
frjim,
You underestimate children substantially.
I had to explain to my four year old daughter when she asked me, “What is abortion?” At the time we were Episcopalians and my political awareness was confined to local zoning disputes.
Even the very sanitized explanation I gave her shocked her deeply. She understood at a gut level that killing little babies is wrong.
What is so hard to understand about that?
I feel bad for his daughters. They must understand (or will some day) the fact that he feels he was punished by their birth. How very sad.
@Sissy– on discussion boards that person you describe is called a troll.
@frjim4321–I hope you don’t share your pro-abortion sentiments with your flock, we have enough small c Catholics as it is. I’ll leave it at that out of respect for the office of the Priesthood.
AAM . . . you were indoctrinating your children with your own beliefs. Which is your right. I don’t take that from you.
Pooh . . . it’s not my job to indoctrinate the faithful with my idiosyncratic sentiments. Frankly if you were a parishioner here we would probably get along very well.
frjim4321: Answering a child truthfully that abortion is murder is “indoctrination” in one’s own beliefs? The fact that abortion is murder is objective truth, Father; it is not a mere subjective “belief”. Are you a relativist priest, Father? Is Catholicism just someone’s belief? Or is it true?
poohbear: I know the term one would use on other blogs, but I believe Fr. Z answered in the affirmative a while back when someone asked whether frjim4321 is an actual priest. So, I won’t use that term for him.
” b/c I really don’t think Romney is essentially any different in this regard.”
Are you saying that you do not believe that a person can change from pro abortion to pro life frjim?
Romney has stated that he is pro life.
Perhaps you just choose not to believe him because it gives wiggle room for a vote for Obama.
We absolutely know where Obama stands. He has made it clear. But then–you know that.
I would think Fr. Pflager will be voting for him also.
Hello Fr. Jim. The laity can be foolish, silly, petty, crabby, pleasant, supportive, and so on, but clueless cannot be included in the descriptors. We understand, now anyway, that it is more important to pay attention to what our clergy does not say, as much as what they do, that will tell us where they are on the issues. So I doubt your congregation does not know where your opinion lies. Your words or your silence is scrutinized weekly, at least by discerning Catholics.
I am deeply shocked reading Fr. Jim’s seemingly or purposively ignorant comments on pro-lifers and Obama. I can imagine – hardly understand, but imagine – an honest person, even a catholic or clergyman supporting the O-man for his alleged care for the poor, for his initiative to install a public healthcare system (in the principle idea), for willing to limit military engagement abroad (although freedom is nowhere safe without American engagement, we Germans know that – or should know that – best), even (which I strongly disapprove) for promoting “homosexual rights”. Never, though, would I be able to swallow the fact that there is a priest who takes equal distance from the sides in the public war over industrialized mass-killing of the unborn, and, rather than addressing the core issue, calling it what it is, infanticide, instead elaborates over “disgusting” or “indoctrinating” behavior of pro-life demonstrators.
This is, in my humble opinion, disgusting. Fr. Jim, please stop washing your hands before the crowd. Start listening to the voice that provides the answer to your question “Quid est veritas?”
I am always saddened when I read that a priest, a man of God, is cool with and even advocates for a man who voted in favor of infanticide 4 times as a State senator. This priest probably has parishioners that will have to choose to close their business because Obama and Sebelius are going to force Catholics to pay for abortions and contraceptives.
Who says kids are forced to go pro life rallies? My 6y/o daughter asked me what abortion was after a priest prayed for victims of abortion. I did not want to tell her about this brutal reality, but I did. A couple of months later she had heard about the pro life march and wanted to go, she thought she would really help babies and their mothers that way.
You bet my kids were indoctrinated in 2008. I told them Obama Had a mindset that didn’t believe in the Constitution, or that our rights are God given. And lo and behold….. My kids made their own Tea Party signs, one of the neighbor kids asked if he could come along to a few Tea Party rallies. Another high school aged friend of my son’s met us at a Tea Party rally in 09, because he was disgusted by the blatant indoctrination taking place at his public high school.
I hope religious liberty will still be standing in a few years, but I am saddened that a Catholic priest openly advocates for a man who wants me to pay for abortions.
“Punished with a baby.”
I just can’t get beyond the fatuity of that phrase.
He rose from His knees one of His disciples said to Him, “Master, teach us to pray, just as John taught his disciples.” …
What a proud father El Presidente will be when one of his daughters says to him, teach us how to “…engage in issues (wE care about,”
frjim,
“Indoctrinating” is an ugly word, with overtones of propaganda and compulsion. I am beginning to suspect that you use it deliberately, for incendiary purposes.
Astounding! that a priest of God would characterize as “indoctrination” a mother teaching her dear, worried daughter that every life is precious in the eyes of God. It’s what you ought to be teaching, too.
The mind boggles.
And if you think your parishioners don’t know what you believe, think again. You cannot live a lie.
An American Mother,
You are absolutely right.
I wish my kids didn’t know abortion existed. But as they do know (it’s too public to protect them from it), it’s ridiculous to say they can’t comprehend it independently. There is no child on earth that, when told that some mothers go to the doctor to have a fetus removed, will not ask, “Does that mean it dies?” There is no child on earth that will not think of that as killing a baby. You can work very, very hard and talk an older child into believing it is not murder, indoctrinating is only possible in one direction.
“AAM . . . you were indoctrinating your children with your own beliefs. Which is your right. I don’t take that from you.
Pooh . . . it’s not my job to indoctrinate the faithful with my idiosyncratic sentiments. Frankly if you were a parishioner here we would probably get along very well.”- Fr. Jim
Father, all I can say is.. excuse me? Indoctrinating your children with your own beliefs? In order to be Catholic you have to believe at minimum that God is absolute veracity, absolute Truth, it is a dogma of the Catholic Faith. Likewise, at a minimum, you have to believe that this absolute Truth has communicated His Truth by means of His self-revelatory Word, made flesh as Jesus Christ, and which self-revealing Word is continually being made present in Sacred Tradition through the guidance of the Holy Spirit; simply, the Catholic Church possesses the fullness of that Truth who is God. If you teach your kids the Catholic Faith, you are teaching them absolute Truth, not indoctrinating them, and the Catholic Faith holds that abortion is the murder of the innocent, which is objectively immoral. This IS NOT OPINION, Father! This is not idiosyncratic sentiments the likes of which would entail the indoctrination of your parishioners if you impressed them upon the people you shepherd. This is absolute Truth, and both Fathers (Priests) and fathers (dads) have a duty and obligation to teach the Truth to those entrusted to them. To not do so is to fail the very mission and essence of both.
I can’t even begin to comprehend how you can think what you’re saying is Catholic. It boggles my mind.
frjim4321 says:
B0b . . . correct, it is about choice.
No surprise–you missed the point: To say it is about choice is to say nothing.
BTW, where did the Bob stuff come from?
He wants his “daughters to be able to make their own choices about their health care. ”
Aside from the reality that PP doesn’t provide healthcare, the majority of Americans want Obama- death -care repealed, precisely because they “want make their own choices about their health care .”
Real health care that is. Get that Mr. Obama????????
@frjim4321 Parents have a duty to bring their children up in the faith. The commandment “Thou shalt not kill” is not an idiosyncrasy. And we cannot vote for one who promotes it.
One of the most hopeful and edifying aspects of the March for Life in January is the huge turnout of young people attending, who are our future. These children have wonderful parents!!! They have taught them early and by example to participate in the new evangelization called for by Vatican II and by our Holy Father. What do you think of that?
My dear brothers and sisters – I hope you do realize in our – ahem! – debate with Fr. Jim we are also, de facto, debaitng with the majority of the priests and bishops in this country (the debate of the HHS mandate notwithstanding). There is anecdotal evidence up to 55% of our bishops voted for the current POTUS.
For all intents and purposes they consider us on the lunatic fringe (yes, white martyrdom indeed!).
Call it the affect of “FDR/New Deal” yellow dog democrats or the insipid and off base “seamless garment theory” on all “life issues” – this is, in fact, the case. (and I say that as a registered democrat since I was 18 – which I would *never* consider voting for in one this day and age).
Well they can all call me crazy all they want because there is *no proportional reason* to justify voting for anyone who justifies infanticide. None whatsoever.
@ JKnott:
Excellent comment, sir/ma’am.
MSM
Sorry, “debating,” not “debaitng.”
Mea Culpa.
frjim4321 says: “. . . consider Sarah Palin’s pandering, using her special needs child as a television prop at the 2008 RNC convention. Same difference.”
No. Not even close. Sarah Palin was introduced to the public at the Convention and brought along her entire family, including the prospective son-in-law (an embarrassment, but potentially a member of her family), and including her Downs Syndrome child. She did not leave out the last child, as if he were something shameful to be hidden away (someone whose birth Obama would likely consider to be a “mistake”) , and she did not single him out or otherwise use him in any exploitative manner.
There is a great deal of difference between her presenting her “special needs” child right along with the rest of her children, as is customary for public introductions of political nominees, and Obama’s multiple uses of his daughters as fodder for his promotion of birth control and abortion.
You may dislike her political views, but Sarah Palin is a decent, honest, and honorable woman; essentially, the polar opposite of Obama.
Midwest St. Michael: it is that very realization that fills me with sorrow every time I read one of frjim4321’s posts. It’s so disheartening to think of a priest who admits he dissents from Catholic teaching on life being a shepherd to a flock. We need to pray for vocations.
You may dislike her political views, but Sarah Palin is a decent, honest, and honorable woman; essentially, the polar opposite of Obama.
Could be, PAT, but my gut feeling was that she was using the child (Her child? Her grandchild?) as a stage prop. But that’s just my gut and of course I could be wrong. Maybe I’m way off course and she’s a decent person. Generally speaking I read people pretty well. I’ll grant you that this might be an exception.
frjim,
Now that reaches new depths of nastiness.
If you could look beyond your shameful prejudices for a moment, you would not give scandal by repeating an obvious lie. Do you know anything about the frequency of Downs in young (18-21 y.o.) mothers?
And I guess you’d like her to shut that sweet little boy away in an institution, so that your perfectly horrendous vision of a world where children like him are merely a “choice” won’t be disturbed.
Shame, shame, shame.
frjim4321 says:
Could be, PAT, but my gut feeling was that she was using the child (Her child? Her grandchild?) as a stage prop. But that’s just my gut and of course I could be wrong. Maybe I’m way off course and she’s a decent person. Generally speaking I read people pretty well. I’ll grant you that this might be an exception.
Fancy that. Gee, I wonder whether the fact that you’re a big lib has anything to do with your opinion of Palin.
To those whose minds are boggled by Fr. Jim’s comments…
I think we might do well to remember the parable of the Road to Emmaus. Sadly, there are many among us who, even in the presence of our Lord Himself, cannot see Him and do not recognize Him. I can think of nothing else to explain how our Lord’s beloved priests, bishops, and religious can vote for a President who is pro-abortion, pro gay marriage, and is actively forcing members of the Catholic Church to commit sin and violate the free exercise of our religion. The teaching of Holy Mother Church is not wrong about these issues. She can’t be. She is the Bride of Christ. To insist that She is wrong is to insist that Christ Himself is wrong. This can never, and will never be.
President Obama and Secretary Sebelius, among others, are openly and actively persecuting the members of the Body of Christ through their HHS mandate. We can, should, and must pray fervently for their conversion and for the conversion of those who support them. If they refuse to be converted and persist in their persecution, one day at Judgement, they will hear the voice of Our Lord say to them, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute Me?” I cannot conceive of anything more desolate or more intensely painful than to hear Our Lord direct those Words toward any one of us personally. Although I shudder to imagine the expression of longing and heartbreak on His Holy Face that would accompany those words.
Pray, pray, pray for the conversion of the souls of our liberal brethren.
“(Her child? Her grandchild?)”
frjim—Do you have anything to back that statement up-other than the disgusting untrue talking points of MSNBC and the Democrats? The pro abortion crowd (that you seem to have not problem with) on the other hand were outraged that she had this special needs child instead of aborting him. Your side likes to talk out of both sides of their mouths at the same time.
I won’t even go into how ugly they have been to her daughter–who kept her baby. That goes against Obama’s PP view for his daughters -that we hear about so much.
Actually, this comment does say more about you than Sarah Palin.
FrJim isnt really a Priest, is he?
If he is.. thank God he isnt mine.
The only person who seriously believes that Sarah Palin is raising her daughter’s Down Syndrome child as her own is the very nasty, unhinged Andrew Sullivan. Sullivan has been publically reprimanded by his employers and told not to repeat this canard in their publication. The fact that frjim4321 repeats this ugly, obvious libel tells you quite a bit about his mindset.
St. Jude: well…he may be a priest, but one wonders of what Church or ecclesial community.
Look at it this way…he’s a poster child for what’s wrong with seminary training (if Catholic) over the last 40 years.
Or, as Fr. Z is fond of pointing out…a priest’s particular judgement will either be an event of fulfillment or one of abject terror. Of whom much is given, much will be expected. And one charged with the salvation of souls in line with Catholic teaching has a heavy burden. I’d not like to be in their shoes; answering for my sins will be enough to worry about.
I’m not judging, mind you, but, I can’t help wondering whether he’s just a troll hiding behind a username that would infer reception of Orders, or a real live Catholic priest who’s seriously off the rails and quaffed deeply at the Bernadin/Weakland/Hunthausen well of secular humanism as the pinnacle of spiritual development.
But, if I was in his St. Superfun Rockband parish…I’d be real worried. People are asking for bread…and getting stones, if he preaches to them the way he lectures us.
“I’m not judging, mind you, but, I can’t help wondering whether he’s just a troll hiding behind a username that would infer reception of Orders, or a real live Catholic priest who’s seriously off the rails and quaffed deeply at the Bernadin/Weakland/Hunthausen well of secular humanism as the pinnacle of spiritual development.”
Mr. Boyle, I have often thought this myself.
MSM