Err, sure, but the Repubs controlled it for 12 years before that (6 of those years under Bush), which is why I found the statement baffling.

David McKay - 05 September 2008 03:43 PM

No one has mentioned to fantastic headline of a few days ago

A bump on the road to the White House

Hi David,

Yes I did read that headline - but it is only NOW, after your alert, that I can stop to comprehend the special ‘humour’ behind it. Sub-editors need a special award don’t they - or do they already have a category in the Walkley Awards ?

Cheers, Kevin

Alan Dungey - 05 September 2008 03:33 PM

I guess raising two orphans from overseas (McCain) and giving life to a child with Downs Syndrome (Palin) doesn’t cut it for you, Angus, in the “caring for the disadvantaged” stakes.  Or do words speak louder than actions?

Hi Alan. Of course raising orphans is a commendable act of love, and yes I applaud Palin’s decision not to abort her disabled child. However, McCain’s failed marriage shows his very ‘human’ qualities too.

Is America’s fixation on this issue (and Democrats are just as fixating on defending to the death the right to abort children) really so bad?

Yes it is, because most ‘normal’ people understand that running a country well is about so much more than just one or two complex social issues.

It seems to me that Americans are passionate about the issues that really matter, whereas politicians in other countries squabble over trifles.

So, because G W Bush was a strong advocate of banning abortions he was a better choice than Al Gore or John Kerry? I think history will regard his presidency rather unfavourably as most Americans do now given his current approval rating there. (eg His views on abortion apparently didn’t stop him from starting a illegal war in Iraq.) Anyhow I don’t know of any countries that “squabble over trifles”, even our own country that is blessed with two major parties whose policies differ very little in most regards.

The older generation are less at ease talking about their faith in public.

Fair point, I’ll concede that.

Just type “Obama” and “Tony Rezko” into google and see what turns up.

I’m well aware of Chicago ‘politics’ and Rezko and Obama’s family home purchase etc. There’s really very little to point at Obama except being stupidly naive in associating with Rezko once he was ‘under investigation’.

However, McCain’s failed marriage shows his very ‘human’ qualities too.

So if his marriage didn’t fail, he wouldn’t be human ? ( Reads like a ‘cheap shot’ from the left to me. )

I don’t think that we need to have a divorce in order to prove that we are ‘human’.  Besides, I don’t see your point - unless you are saying that he is not perfect - which means he is just like the rest of us.

( I say this in the light of hearing within 6 days, of two keen Christian couples that we know, announcing that ‘they’re getting a divorce’ - so I might be over-sensitive at the moment. )

Kevin Goddard - 05 September 2008 10:11 PM

So if his marriage didn’t fail, he wouldn’t be human ? ( Reads like a ‘cheap shot’ from the left to me. )

No, I was really just trying to say he’s human and makes mistakes like we all do while acknowledging and commending his good qualities.

( I say this in the light of hearing within 6 days, of two keen Christian couples that we know, announcing that ‘they’re getting a divorce’ - so I might be over-sensitive at the moment. )

I’m really sorry to hear that. It’s only by God’s grace that any of our marriages survive. I certainly don’t think a good marriage is something to boast about.

Angus Johnson - 05 September 2008 09:33 PM

Alan Dungey - 05 September 2008 03:33 PM

Is America’s fixation on this issue (and Democrats are just as fixating on defending to the death the right to abort children) really so bad?

Yes it is, because most ‘normal’ people understand that running a country well is about so much more than just one or two complex social issues.

Angus, I’m afraid you lost me here.

Abortion is not just a “complex issue” that might somehow pale into significance beside “running a country well “.

Abortion is a part, a very ugly part of the sexual revolution of the 1960’s that has caused untold damage to the fabric of society, especially in the poorer sections of society - children being brought up in dysfunctional families, women deserted with men who are able to gain sexual favours without the commitment of marriage, women told its “your choice”, the coldest hardest words, deserted and facing a decision whether to end the life of their own flesh and blood. Do you know anything of the torture of a decision by a woman to end their baby’s life, deserted by their sexual partner, perhaps her parents as well – what woman doesn’t understand the child in their womb is “their baby” – even hard callous women know that. There are some things that you cannot not know.

As a society we care about 1500 road deaths, alcoholism, illegal drug taking, obesity, climate change and we don’t give a damn about 80,000 to 100,000 abortions – we hide from the knowledge that it is a real human being, a developing human life with their own unique DNA, just like anyone of us, that is having his or her life ripped away. And I say 80,000 -100,000 abortions and not a precise number as for road deaths because we don’t know the true figure. Why? Because it is the dark underbelly to our society we don’t want to know about.

There are European nations facing extinction within the next 100 years – never mind climate change - because those societies have turned in on themselves, seeking pleasure but not accepting the responsibility of bringing a new generation to life.

Yes I think schooling, public transport, industry, law and order, building a better environment are important and the stuff of Governments, but I think building families where men commit to women, marriages open to children, loving sacrificial relationships is the bedrock of society. Abortion is one of the clearest measures of how sick our society is. Abortion I believe one day will be viewed as the slavery issue of 200 years ago. The question is, who will be our Wilberforce? Do we have a Wilberforce on the Sydney Anglican forum?

Hi David. I’m not pro-abortion. However, while it’s an important issue I don’t see it as a defining issue on who I vote for.

Angus Johnson - 06 September 2008 12:21 AM

Hi David. I’m not pro-abortion. However, while it’s an important issue I don’t see it as a defining issue on who I vote for.

Angus, we are all free to choose our defining issues, and abortion is one possible contender. However, that said, my question to you is, “do you understand why abortion is an important issue, not just in its own right but as a marker as well for the general state of the society in which we live”? Because if you do, I think it will be one of the important “defining issues” for you, and you will then be surprised how a particular attitude on this issue will correlate with attitudes on other “defining issues”.

Anyway I better stop lest you find me hectoring you.

I think I was a bit tough on Angus in my last post. I’m extremely annoyed about how the abortion debate is going in Melbourne, not going actually – the media are basically refusing to print anything about the issue (it is an issue to be swept under the carpet) except for some of the offensive tactics of the right to life people.

In a way, as Angus infers/says and I acknowledged in my previous posts, an issue like abortion shouldn’t be the business of Government. Of course because of the breakdown of the family (yes I know there are other factors, however I just want to concentrate on the most important), Governments get involved in various ways having to do things that they really shouldn’t have to.

It may be that the great bulk of us are located in the more affluent segments of society and regardless of whether this is so or not, because of Christian conviction, the work of God in our lives, we actually think sex belongs inside marriage, children the natural and looked for outcome of the relationship of love between a man and a woman committed to one another as certified by the making of solemn binding promises before witnesses. 

However as we know it is not like this in the world outside.  Since the fateful 1960’s, Men think they are entitled and they do get sex outside the commitments of marriage. Relationships get made and broken and reforged with new partners, and the whole thing is a bloody mess. Some people make it through and stable families get made, but along the way women especially get hurt and abortion appears as the dark and unspoken underbelly of the 1960’s sexual revolution, a kind of escape valve.

In the 18th Century on the crest of evangelical revival Wilberforce and his friends got together to work for the abolition of slavery. It didn’t happen overnight (forgive me if I repeat what you already know).

The campaign began in 1787 as a two-pronged venture with Wilberforce, a member of Parliament, close confidante of the Prime Minister, William Pitt the Younger and just 28 years of age having been converted two years earlier.

The first step was the successful mobilising of public opinion against the slave trade through public meetings organised by Wilberforce and his friends throughout the length and breadth of the county.

However this was occurring against the backdrop of a lack of will for reform in the Parliament and the period of the French Revolution and subsequent long war with France. The French Revolution especially generated considerable public disapproval of all apparently progressive causes. It was only when Wilberforce and his colleagues reduced the scope of their bill in 1806 to make it illegal to supply slaves to the foreign colonies of powers with which Britain was at war, that they achieved success. In the following year they followed this success up with the passing of their bill for the complete abolition of the slave trade, and then a further twenty six years elapsed before a bill to suppress the institution of slavery throughout the British Empire was passed.

It we are to ever hope for a reformation in our modern day equivalent of the institution of slavery, i.e. the institution of abortion, then we too must galvanise public opinion against abortion, which is also to say that we must galvanise public opinion against the notion that men and women of whatever age can engage in sexual activity outside the commitments of marriage. We must engage on behalf of women themselves and especially for the most vulnerable members of our community, the unborn. For this to happen there must be a revival of religion not just in the churches but amongst the general public.

Nevertheless in the meantime, we need to engage politically, little by little, one step at a time. We must lift the veil of secrecy enveloping an evil practice. Abortion is an incredibly sad commentary on the state of our society and one abortion for every three live births is both a personal tragedy and a national disgrace. No wonder the figures are not disclosed by the authorities. We know about road deaths and the percentage of young people smoking, but everything to do with abortion is shrouded in secrecy because everyone knows it is a bad thing. There are some things that you can’t not know, no matter how hard you try to hide them. It is for the church to lift the veil of secrecy, to shout the truth about this culture of death whilst finding practical measures act with love and sympathy for women who have been deserted or led astray and of course for love of the unborn child as well.

We must work with fellow Christians and good hearted people of whatever hue, and we must do so in dependence upon God who calls us to a noble cause, never giving way to despair despite the rarely concealed hatred of the abortion lobby and the sheer indifference of so many fellow Australians.

I needed to get that out of my system, partly because I think good church going people of loving, concerned evangelical hue such as appear on these threads are a bit like ordinary non church going people not wanting to be reminded of the truth about abortion and what it represents, and somewhat embarrassed (as I am) by the antics of the right to life people.

Thanks David for your hard work on the abortion question, by the way. Praying for you.

It is hard to get past Obama’s stand on abortion, which goes to the extent of sanctioning the failure to intervene in the preservation of lives of babies born alive; that is to say, passive infanticide.

See here. Came via Justin Taylor.

Good morning David,

Thanks for your post. It makes sobering reading at this early hour - and a whole lot of sense. Wilberforce and his friends’ efforts are certainly godly examples of hanging in there until the job is done - no matter how long it takes.

We certainly live in an era where ‘traditional’ values have long been discounted as ‘old fashioned’ and past their ‘use by date’ by many. Our modern city lifestyles certainly seem to reflect the moral abandonment that we read of in Romans. Paul could just as easily have been talking about Australia 2008 - not just Rome.

Cheers, Kevin

ps I am at least gladdened by Hawthorn’s crushing win last night

Kevin Goddard - 06 September 2008 09:31 AM

ps I am at least gladdened by Hawthorn’s crushing win last night

Yes, but that might explain a part of my aggravation - I’m a Bulldog supporter, may be I was crushed as well!

I intend coming back, not directly on abortion, but on the general issue of how far do we get into these social issues when many might be wondering “but isn’t this a distraction to our main business of winning people to Christ and building up the church”.

It we are to ever hope for a reformation in our modern day equivalent of the institution of slavery, i.e. the institution of abortion, then we too must galvanise public opinion against abortion

I should have said that we are not alone on this score. The knowledge that ultrasound brings is a great help. Angela Shanahan has an article in the Australian today looking at the data on public opinion re abortion and it is beginning to shift in a more conservative dirtection. The Sexton research undertaken by the Southern Cross Bioethics Institute and which informed the approach of the Ad Hoc Interfaith Committee’s to Parliament over the Government’s Bill showed that only 42% of respondents did not think the foetus a person, while 87% confronted by the statistics on abortion said they would be in favour of measures to reduce the number of abortions so long as women had access to abortion. The respondents then went on to give big ticks to things like mandatory information including women’s health aspects for proceeding/not proceeding, mandatory referral for counselliong, cooling off periods, anti-coercion measures, etc. (The Victorian Law Reform Commission acknowledged the superiority, with a few caveats of the Sexton research over all other available Australian research into public attitudes)

There, I’m finished on this subject.

Angus stated:

Sadly the Christian Right in America has been fixated for far too long on Roe v Wade and creationism in schools and has almost lost sight of important social justice issues (eg care for the disadvantaged).

And Roslyn replied:

Thank you Angus. I’m so glad to hear a view that goes beyond the one-dimensional assumption that the ‘Christian right’ will or should vote for the party or candidate that is against abortion and other similar ‘morality’ issues.

Roslyn,

Welcome to the SA forums. I look forward to your further contributions, and trust you wont be deterred by the passion of many of the participants here: They are all good people.

Angus,

An astute comment perhaps, but unfortunately it would seem to have derailed this thread .

I almost never comment on abortion, but in the hope that this particular discussion may focus on all the other issues involved in the U.S. Presidential campaign, I have resurrected the ‘Pro-Life’ thread, and ask the members that they might consider limiting their comments on that subject to there.

David Palmer quoted Spengler:

Obama will spend the rest of his life wondering why he rejected the obvious road to victory, that is, choosing Hillary Clinton as his vice presidential nominee. However reluctantly, Clinton would have had to accept. McCain’s choice of vice presidential candidate made obvious after the fact what the party professionals felt in their fingertips at the stadium extravaganza yesterday: rejecting Clinton in favor of the colorless, unpopular, tangle-tongued Washington perennial Joe Biden was a statement of weakness. McCain’s selection was a statement of strength. America’s voters will forgive many things in a politician, including sexual misconduct, but they will not forgive weakness.

That is why McCain will win in November, and by a landslide, barring some unforeseen event. Obama is the most talented and persuasive politician of his generation, the intellectual superior of all his competitors, but a fatally insecure personality. American voters are not intellectual, but they are shrewd, like animals. They can smell insecurity, and the convention stank of it. Obama’s prospective defeat is entirely of its own making. No one is more surprised than Republican strategists, who were convinced just weeks ago that a weakening economy ensured a Democratic victory.

Hah.Ha, David, dont tell me you actually take this guy seriously?!

Obama is the most talented and persuasive politician of his generation, the intellectual superior of all his competitors

That statement is right on the money - the rest is nonsense.

Those of us who have been devotees of NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ (Alan? Luke?), hosted by the late and much-lamented Tim Russert (Tom Brokaw is a poor substitute) have been long familar with the erudite Mr. Biden. He is possibly the most astute and insightful member on Capitol Hill.

In selecting him, Obama demonstrated a confidence and fearlessness; that he will win over Hillary’s supporters without her and an acknowledgement of what can be gained with Biden’s knowledge and experience.

In contrast, McCain’s decision was a move of desperation, after his first two choices (Joe Lieberman and former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge) were both vetoed by the Republican Heirarchy.

from the Republican Convention:

“What’s the difference between a Hockey Mum and a Pit Bull?

One of us is a dipstick”

Rob

Rob,

I think it is ironic that almost as soon as Angus said Christians shouldn’t be fixated by abortion (my meagre follow-up post was generally bypassed), the forum was derailed in precisely that direction.  it certainly wasn’t my intention.