Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Darn it Obama!

He promised to do it and boy did he follow through. Wow, he waited just one day to make this official.  

He has made the U.S. free to provide taxpayer dollars to promote and provide abortions abroad. This is the first time that dollars can be taken from the federal treasury to take a life...my tax dollars btw. This is so far beyond the responsibility of the U.S. taxpayer; it's ridiculous.

Why should we be paying for any family planning services abroad? How does this help America if babies in the Philippines are aborted? Does he (and the liberals) really think controlling the population in third world countries is  going to solve our problems? 

By the way, our country won't be paying for abortions in France or Ireland but countries in Africa and SE Asia where "we" think the population needs to be controlled because they are not worthwhile producers or useful. This is one of the most racist ideas I have ever heard.

This is very similar to how the abortion movement got started in the US.  Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood in order to stop Italians, Jews and blacks from reproducing. This grew in popularity as whites put more and more abortion clinics in black neighborhoods in order to control the black population.  After all, who wants them reproducing, right? We don't value their lives because they are useful members of society.  Why don't we consider this genocide?

How is anyone who values life okay with this? Seriously, how can you be okay with this? How do you justify this in your head/heart when you are alone by yourself?

Also, Arab nations will hate us even more now.  Do you like muslims like this?  No.  It's a terrible message to be sending to Arab nations. It shows how morally corrupt we really are. They love it when we impose our values on other nations, right? Here's the other thing, we aren't imposing our values to promote freedom (different subject altogether), we are imposing our (not mine, Obama's) values in order to kill generations of Tanzanians.

Tax season is coming up, folks.  Will it be harder for you to write that check knowing this? (I may spit on mine.)


Doreen T. said...

I can see the headlines now.... "Pregnant woman spits on check to IRS; DNA now on file"

Seriously, Kara, you have summed up my disgust with this decision. My fear is that President Obama will take it a step further and sign the FOCA. Instead of spitting on my tax check, however, I think I'll pray for President Obama.

Kara said...

What a good christian you are mom.

e said...

Really sad about this too.
Is it the first time though...I thought Clinton was the first to sign in favor of this, then Bush reversed it and now it has been reversed yet again?

Lucas Price said...

You know that isn't actually true, right? The policy he changed has nothing to do with paying for abortions. It is commonly called a "gag order" because it is about talking about abortion.
Non profits that talk about abortions or perform abortions are now able to apply for US funds the same way every other non profit can. It isn't money for abortions. It is money for non-profits that use other monies they have for abortion related activity. It is also not the US government performing abortions.
This is not a new policy. The gag order didn't exist before Reagan, and did not exist during the Clinton administration.
I don't agree with his new policy, but stretching the facts plays into the destructive culture war.

Lucas Price said...

Hi Kara,
Trying to figure out how to write how much I disagree with you in a very loving way.

I don't support Obama's policy. But please stick to the facts.

I believe the following false assumptions are in your post:
--Obama is doing this because he is attempting third world genocide?
--agencies are operating with that goal in mind?
--this is intended as a method of population control?
--this is intended to be used to give people abortions who don't want them? (imposing values)

If you have any facts to support any of those assumptions in your post, I want to read them and will acknowledge my ignorance and retract.

I want to repeat, I DO NOT SUPPORT THIS POLICY. But in my opinion your post is neither an accurate representation of the history, the substance, nor intent of Obama's order. (I hope that wasn't mean)

That might not seem important compared to abortion, unless you know a lot of people like I do that are victims of the culture war.

Ascribing intent to Obama other then what he said is similar to "bush lied, people died", as if that was his intent.

Let's do our part to end the culture war. Let's assume the best motives of the people even when we disagree with the policy. Don't stop disagreeing, but disagree on results and policies.

Kara said...

Call it what you will but the United States Agency for International Development is now able to provide dollars (our tax dollars) to any international NGO that "performs or actively promotes abortion as a method of family planning". Those are Obama's words. The agency was restricted from doing that before he lifted the ban.

How Indonesia is treating you guys well!

Kara said...

Hope, not how. my bad.

Kara said...

I don't think all of those were my assumptions. I don't think Obama or those NGOs is/are racist and trying to commit genocide intentionally. On the other hand, I think I was clear is writing that I don't see much of a difference between Hitler's policies and that of the abortion movement in the US and now imposing those values of the third world....clearly both based on eugenics. I'm just trying to draw a parallel here.

I think I was pretty accurate in my view of history and substance but I guess I wasn't clear on Obama's intent. I really doubt he sees this like I do. I'm not really sure what his intentions are. I'm sure his intentions are good though. He seems like a good guy. Just because he intends to do good though doesn't make it the right thing.

PS...I'm not a victim.
PPS...I appreciate your loving way ;)

Lucas Price said...

I don't know if those are your assumptions, but I would argue that the are the implicit assumptions of your blog post.

Argument 1:
Person A wants to feed to the hungry of world so that everyone thinks he is the messiah and he is egomaniac.

Person B also wants to feed the hungry of the world.

Person B must be an egomaniac.

Argument 2:
Huge parts American Christian Church embraced the most racist parts Nazi ideology before and during WWII. Thus the American Christian Church is carrying forward the Nazi ideology today.

Most of what you said, Kara, is right on. But some of what you said is taking the same form as the ridiculous arguments I made above. PP's advocacy and activity is well know. You don't have to attack them via a founder who has been dead for a long time and hasn't set the policy for an even longer time.

I just don't see the connection between nazis or eugenics and obama any more then i see it between nazis and christians. That is not to say I am correct, but please elucidate with FACTS and help me understand. The facts presented so far make for a specious connection.

Where is the population control?
Where are the forced abortions? Why do you say "imposing our values" if the abortions are voluntary?

I agree that good intentions don't necessarily make for good results. That isn't what I was saying. What I was trying to say is that in a diverse society, good people get caught in the cross fire when we say bad things about good people, instead of saying bad things about policies and actions.
Eugenics, racism, genocide, forced imposition of values--If these things are going on, then attack away. Attack by showing facts on the ground that show these things, not the conjecture that this is how obama intends to spend tax dollars and other specious connections.

BTW--I DON'T SUPPORT OBAMA'S policy, but.....I recently spent three months in the philippines and over population is problem there in my opinion. The catholic church traditionally has a monopoly on government and thought there, and contraception is actively suppressed. I think the Filipino government should educate and provide contraception to those who want it. The land mass of the Philippines cannot support a population of more then 100 million. I hope I am wrong about that. I would deduce from your original post that my belief about this makes me a racist. Is my deduction wrong?

I love that you are willing to participate in a lively debate personally, and I am dead serious about challenging you to give me facts on the ground. My mind can be changed. Show me real connections.

PS I KNOW you are not a victim; but unfortunately I know some who are.