On Father’s Day Barack Obama delivered a stirring and inspiring speech about the importance of the father in the life of today’s children. While I appreciate and applaud the speech, many are pointing to other stances taken by Obama that they say do not square with his eloquent enjoinder to fathers.
Joshua Claybourn excerpts this from Obama’s speech:
Of all the rocks upon which we build our lives, we are reminded today
that family is the most important. And we are called to recognize and
honor how critical every father is to that foundation. They are
teachers and coaches. They are mentors and role models. They are
examples of success and the men who constantly push us toward it.
But if we are honest with ourselves, we’ll admit that what too many
fathers also are missing – missing from too many lives and too many
homes. . . And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.
He then raises an interesting point – "In light of the numerous recent moves toward homosexual marriages,
where does a lesbian couple with children fit into Obama’s worldview?"
Claybourn’s point is that for Obama if "every father" is critical to the foundation of a family and families are weaker when fathers are not present, how does that not then extend to lesbian couples? You can’t argue that on one hand fathers are integral to the success of a family, while on the other say that lesbian couples where there is no father present by definition are just as beneficial to the child.
The other quote that has been brought back to Obama’s attention is this:
We need fathers to recognize their responsibility doesn’t just end at conception.
Tony Perkins, President of FRC-Action, has put out a new ad which starts with the video of Sen. Obama saying those words. Perkins thanks Obama for his affirmation of fatherhood and then lowers the boom:
If, as you say, fatherhood begins at conception when does life begin?
How does Obama answer that question? It is like the other issue, stating the importance of "every father," it does not match with Obama’s voting record and past statements.
How can you say that men should recognize their responsibility, and by extension their fatherhood, begins at conception, but the life of the baby doesn’t begin until after birth? If abortion is acceptable and the "ending of a pregnancy" up until the moment the baby is born (even after if we count partial birth abortion) is a "right" to be protected, then men have no responsibility to anything until after a baby is born. Is that not the correct, logical extension of support for abortion?
There is no baby. There is no life. There is only a "fetus." What responsibility does anyone have to a "fetus?" The mother doesn’t have any. She can have it "withdrawn" basically any time she would like. The father has none. He doesn’t have a child because their is no life. You can’t make the argument that a "fetus" magically becomes a child when the mother wants it.
What if the dad never wants the child, as is sadly often the case? Does he not have the same right as the mother would? If she doesn’t want it, she can have it "removed." Can he not remove himself from the situation and assuage any guilt by saying, "It was never a child to me. I didn’t want it."
danielg has issued this challenge on numerous occasions and I’ll reissue it again. If life does not start at conception or even at the moment brain waves and/or a heartbeat begins, when does it scientifically start? It seems that those who so often scream the loudest for scientific proof in other areas, shy away from it the quickest when the discussion turns to the beginning of life.
It amazes me that those so enamored with hard, scientific facts in virtually every other area start to get vague and philosophical, even theological, when faced with this simple question – when does life begin?