Welcome to the 2nd installment of YOUR SUNDAY ATHEIST.
This week we will discuss a few different items in the news with a common theme. Click on the headlines below to read the entire articles that are referenced after the jump:
The Saddleback Civil Forum Changes the Face of American Politics
Evangelicals rip Obama's abortion votes
Blurring the distinction between contraception and abortion
Links to PREVIOUS EDITIONS of YOUR SUNDAY ATHEIST:
Please check out last week's premiere edition of the series by following this Link
Reminder: It is never too late to add your own comments, tips & recs to a diary entry.
As readers of last week's diary already know, I decided to launch this series to help pass the time during an extended period of unemployment. But mere hours after posting that first diary, I received a phone call from a prospective employer and found myself reporting for work the very next day.
With the sudden drastic reduction of my idle hours of browsing the blogosphere, I was unable to keep up with the day to day (really hour by hour) news updates on all things political, but I had read about the upcoming Obama - McCain appearance with Pastor Rick Warren already, and also knew that an evangelical group would be meeting in front of the US Capitol in Washington D.C. the same day as the televised Obama - McCain meeting.
My new job brings me to downtown D.C. on a daily basis, and I immediately noticed a number of tourists sporting anti-abortion t-shirts, buttons, and the ever-popular "LIFE" message scrawled on a blood-red background. (The most memorable t-shirt I saw was a play on a Dr. Seuss story. The image was that of Horton the Elephant, and the message was "A person's a person, no matter how small.")
But it wasn't until Saturday evening, after a long first week back on the job, as I walked down Constitution Avenue to meet some friends for dinner, that I heard the loudspeakers and realized why there were so many anti-abortion tourists in town. I took a quick detour and recorded a video clip of what I saw at the rally on the mall yesterday (8/16/08) sponsored by a group named TheCall:
The Saddleback Civil Forum Changes the Face of American Politics
from Marketwatch:.
The hardest hitting questions of the evening centered on abortion and stem cell research and demonstrated one of the most striking differences between the two candidates, as Warren asked, "At what point is a baby entitled to human rights?"
McCain quickly answered, "At the moment of conception. I will be a pro- life president, and this presidency will have pro-life policies."
After mentioning that the specific definition of when life begins was "above my pay grade," Obama replied, "I am pro-choice because, ultimately, I don't think women make these decisions casually. Rather, they wrestle with these things in profound ways." However, Obama did say he was in favor of limits on late-term abortions.
The question is fairly absurd as quoted: A "baby" deserves "human rights" at all times. The real question is when does a fertilized ovum become a baby?
I love Obama's response about the definition of life being above his pay grade. McCain, well, not quite so humble, are we, Johnny boy?
Evangelicals rip Obama's abortion votes
from The Washington Times:
Evangelical Christian leaders of TheCall DC, a large youth prayer rally slated for Saturday on the Mall, criticized presumptive Democratic nominee Sen. Barack Obama on Friday for his liberal votes on abortion.
"We're not endorsing a candidate," lead organizer Lou Engle said. "We're challenging politicians who say they're Christian but have voted 100 percent for late-term abortions and partial-birth abortions."
He added, "I don't want to be courted by his Christianity or his charisma, but by his voting record."
Their Friday news conference, billed as a walk-up to Saturday's gathering, quickly turned into a discussion of what kind of presidential candidate America's evangelicals would rally behind and on presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain considering a pro-choice running mate.
If you have the stomach to click on the link to the above story and read the comments left by readers, you will discover that Obama is an "amazingly liberal" "baby killer" who will destroy America and is probably a Muslim. So the choice is obvious: vote for the non-baby killer.
Blurring the distinction between contraception and abortion
from Pharyngula:
There's a Department of Health and Human Services document circulating that's got the pro-choice lobby up in arms ... in addition to the significant threat to reproductive rights that it presents, this proposal is yet another example of the complete lack of scientific expertise informing decisions about public health.
At issue is the determination of a time point that marks the beginning of pregnancy. The consensus of the medical community is that an established pregnancy occurs at the point when the blastocyst successfully implants into the uterine wall. This time point makes a lot of sense in considering early events in the reproductive process. Pre-implantation embryos have a vast distance to travel, complex chemical cues to navigate, and a ticking biological clock to contend with within the bounds of the female reproductive cycle. Roughly 40% of all embryos don't survive the ordeal.
Yes, you read that right. Four out of ten "small persons" never even reach the point where they could even begin to be considered viable human beings.
Naturally, the 'life begins at conception' crowd takes issue with this definition. The DHHS document echoes the concerns of the religious right in a proposal that seeks to give citizens the power to decide for themselves when a pregnancy begins, and act accordingly in exercising their religious freedom. The document details numerous preexisting 'conscience provisions' designed to protect the rights, and the federal funding, of institutions or individual health care workers who decline to perform any service they deem morally objectionable or contrary to their particular belief system. These are the grounds upon which it has been acceptable for ambulance drivers to refuse to transport women to clinics where abortions will be performed, for emergency room staff to fail to offer or administer emergency contraception after a rape, and for pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions for oral contraceptives.
So it seems the same type of executive power to define laws and the meaning of words which the Bush administration has usurped for itself is now to be extended to certain privileged political allies of the GOP: evangelicals who put their own personal religious beliefs above the civil rights of others, to the extent of denying fellow citizens proper medical care.
Federal endorsement of the opinion that life begins at 'conception' (in reality, as we know, the matter is not so easily settled) is a grim development, not only because of what it could mean for abortion rights, but because of how some forms of contraception are reputed to function. Although the indisputable primary effect of oral contraceptives, including EC, is to inhibit ovulation, it has been widely accepted that a secondary mechanism by which these treatments prevent pregnancy is through changes to the uterine lining that decrease the likelihood of successful implantation. Further, interference with the implantation process has long been thought to be the principle mechanism by which IUDs prevent pregnancy. It is thus not surprising that those who believe a pre-implantation embryo is a fully-vested human life consider the above mechanisms forms of abortion, and health-care workers holding this view would, under this new policy, be acting within their rights to freely hold and express their religious beliefs when denying these treatments to patients.
What do you think about those in positions of political, legal and medical authority today dismissing current scientific knowledge in favor of a collection of fables cobbled together over the centuries and sanctified as "the word of God" by a gathering of religious authorities sometime during the middle of the Roman Empire?
What do you think about it? How does it make you feel?
Frankly, it makes me sick.
Now, what shall we do about it?
Discuss.
THE MEANING OF LIFE
This week's Video Rewards (for those readers who made it this far):
For those Roman Catholics who may feel slighted by the previous clip, here's one about the Protestants:
Links to PREVIOUS EDITIONS of YOUR SUNDAY ATHEIST:
Please check out last week's premiere edition of the series by following this Link
Reminder: It is never too late to add your own comments, tips & recs to a diary entry.