In his Notre Dame speech, Obama endorsed "sensible conscience clauses"--- yet his HHS has abandoned their enforcement of the conscience clauses already passed by Congress (the Church Amendments, Coats Amendment, and the Hyde/Weldon Amendment). Isn't it "sensible" to enforce the conscience measures our elected representatives have approved over the past 35 years? What's wrong here?
In his Notre Dame speech, Obama said we must respect others' convictions, whether they are for or against abortion: yet he will compel pro-life citizens to become accomplices to abortion, by requiring to to finance, through our tax dollars, the very thing we find morally intolerable.
We respect Obama, and he kills babies. He respects us, and he makes us pay for it. What's wrong here?
Again in his Notre Dame speech, Obama said opponents of embryonic stem cell research may be upholding the sacredness of life, "but so are the parents of a child with juvenile diabetes who are convinced that their son's or daughter's hardships can be relieved."
He didn't mention that adult stem cells have shown repeated success, in laboratory trials involving animals, at reversing diabetes, and have even produced functioning, insulin-producing islet cells in humans, while embryonic stem cells have shown no such success.
And at Notre Dame, he gets one of the world's most prestigious Catholic podiums to broadcast his self-serving, factually deficient arguments, and nobody can even challenge him on this. This is "dialog"? This is "exposure to challenging ideas"?
What's wrong here?
Your comment is so great, it NAILS it, I have to repeat it and share.
May I?