In the Obama cult, it may indeed be "sacred" to murder one's own child before--or immediately after, according to Barack--one's own child is born.

We must keep context in mind when listening to the Obamas.  While Christianity rightly understands that abortion and infanticide are evils, apparently things are different in Obamaism.

--Mike

www.thebrattonreport.com

Tom. Seeing as how our MSM, the left, and of course Hollywood, have so much love and respect for The Dalai Lama's views on Abortion, would not it be interesting to see reporters ask questions of the pro-abortion candidates and their wives and pundits in light of his view?

‘Abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is an act of killing.’ — The Dalai Lama

Or perhaps in the context of Jimmy Carter's view (WATIMES
November 4, 2005)?

    "I never have felt that any abortion should be committed -- I think each abortion is the result of a series of errors," he told reporters over breakfast at the Ritz-CarltonHotel, while across town Senate Democrats deliberated whether to filibuster the nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. because he may share President Bush and Mr. Carter's abhorrence of abortion.
    "These things impact other issues on which [Mr. Bush] and I basically agree," the Georgia Democrat said. "I've never been convinced, if you let me inject my Christianity into it, that Jesus Christ would approve abortion."

Perhaps Michelle Obama should have phrased her view this way:

He’ll protect a woman’s freedom of choice, because government should have no say in whether or when a woman embraces the sacred responsibility of killing the unborn.

(;~/ gary

delete duplicate post

I know of no other case where an individual has the right to decide for themselves whether an act that involves another person is legal or not. And, considering that the question here is whether it's unjustified homicide, one contrasts the logic:

• Do we allow parents to define what counts as child abuse? No.
• Do we allow spouses to define what counts as spousal abuse? No.

To allow a person to define the legality for themselves is to either abandon or misunderstand the concept of law. Abortion is the only area of the law where we have a competition between the state's interest (the responsibility to defend life) against the individual's interest (the decision to bear a child) where the individual gets to decide the matter of jurisdiction. In every other case, the state sets the jurisdiction.

From a legal perspective, Roe v. Wade is a glaring and embarrassing exception to the rationale of law. It contradicts the logic of every other similar situtation. The state has jurisdiction over every other decision that involves persons, including the right to decide whether other persons are involved ... except in one case: abortion. But why abortion should be an exception is never defended. It is simply imposed by fiat. It is an example where real choice - the right of the people to decide the principles by which we govern ourselves - was taken from the elective process and is now held captive by the judiciary.

The ultimate irony of abortion is that the people never had a choice about the right of choice itself.