Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's niece, Dr. Alveda King, hit the nail on the head when she said that, "The election of an African American president sends a powerful and historic message that what was previously unthinkable can become reality...The battle for equal rights has reached a major milestone, but Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's dream of full equality remains just a dream as long as unborn children continue to be treated no better than property." (Read Dr. King's full statement here).
It was on August 23, 1963, on the occasion of the Civil Rights March on Washington, that Dr. King had said: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." But was the content of Obama's character a real consideration for those who voted for him? How about those in the African-American community? How many voted for Barack Obama simply because he happens to be black? Would Dr. King have approved? For the same reason that a candidate should not be rejected because of the color of his skin, he should not be endorsed solely because of the color of his skin. How many Christians voted for Barack Obama knowing of his radical support for abortion? How about his support for the homosexual agenda?
And what of the content of Barack Obama's character? As Dr. Alveda King correctly noted, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's dream will never be a reality as long as unborn children are treated "no better than property." And yet, the President-elect supports abortion through all nine months of pregnancy up to and including so-called partial-birth abortion (which is actually infanticide). As Bishop Robert J. McManus has said, in a letter which was read in all parishes throughout the Worcester Diocese, "The responsibility of government is to protect the lives of all, especially the weakest and most vulnerable." His Excellency reminded readers of The Catholic Free Press that the "Freedom of Choice Act" (FOCA), which President-elect Obama has promised to sign if passed, would require all states to permit 'partial birth' abortions, invalidate any laws protecting physicians' and hospitals' conscientious objection to abortion, and "deny parents the chance to be involved in their minor daughter's abortion decisions." Additionally, the Bishop said that FOCA "would sweep away over 300 federal, state and local laws and regulations that have been passed to protect the life of unborn children" and called its legislative intention "far more radical" than Roe v. Wade.
I share Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's dream of a nation where the color of skin is irrelevant but the content of a man's character is the decisive issue. But what shall we say about the character of a man who believes that innocent and vulnerable unborn children have no value?
It was on August 23, 1963, on the occasion of the Civil Rights March on Washington, that Dr. King had said: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." But was the content of Obama's character a real consideration for those who voted for him? How about those in the African-American community? How many voted for Barack Obama simply because he happens to be black? Would Dr. King have approved? For the same reason that a candidate should not be rejected because of the color of his skin, he should not be endorsed solely because of the color of his skin. How many Christians voted for Barack Obama knowing of his radical support for abortion? How about his support for the homosexual agenda?
And what of the content of Barack Obama's character? As Dr. Alveda King correctly noted, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's dream will never be a reality as long as unborn children are treated "no better than property." And yet, the President-elect supports abortion through all nine months of pregnancy up to and including so-called partial-birth abortion (which is actually infanticide). As Bishop Robert J. McManus has said, in a letter which was read in all parishes throughout the Worcester Diocese, "The responsibility of government is to protect the lives of all, especially the weakest and most vulnerable." His Excellency reminded readers of The Catholic Free Press that the "Freedom of Choice Act" (FOCA), which President-elect Obama has promised to sign if passed, would require all states to permit 'partial birth' abortions, invalidate any laws protecting physicians' and hospitals' conscientious objection to abortion, and "deny parents the chance to be involved in their minor daughter's abortion decisions." Additionally, the Bishop said that FOCA "would sweep away over 300 federal, state and local laws and regulations that have been passed to protect the life of unborn children" and called its legislative intention "far more radical" than Roe v. Wade.
I share Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's dream of a nation where the color of skin is irrelevant but the content of a man's character is the decisive issue. But what shall we say about the character of a man who believes that innocent and vulnerable unborn children have no value?
Related reading here.
I don't see how anyone can refer to Obama's election as a victory for equality as long as he supports the murder of unborn children.
ReplyDeleteOn January 17, 2000, Martin Luther King Jr.s niece, Alveda King, spoke at a pro-life meeting at Faneuil Hall of Boston University. She said:
ReplyDelete"What would Martin Luther King say if he saw the skulls of babies at the bottom of abortion pits? If Martin Luther King's dream is to live, our babies must live. We have been fueled by the fires of women's rights. What about the rights of the baby who is artifically breached. We can't sit idly by and allow legal murder." (Martin Luther King's Niece Supports Right To Life, Boston University Daily Free Press, 18 January 2000, p.1)
Alveda King's father was A.D. King; Martin's brother, and a civil-rights leader in his own right. He died in 1969.
President-elect Barack Obama would sit idly by and allow murder. In fact, he will support it with legislation!
Excellent post!!! Touche. Read how Obama will begin promoting more abortions the very day after being elected:
ReplyDeleteObama Officials Confirm He Will Fund Foreign Abortions Starting Wednesday
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
January 19, 2009
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Officials with the incoming administration of Barack Obama have confirmed that he will indeed overturn a pro-life policy of President Bush on his first day in office. Despite campaigning on the rhetoric of wanting to reduce abortions, Obama will make one of his first actions promoting them globally.
Meanwhile, some 77 members of Congress have signed onto a letter asking Obama to back down from doing so.
President Bush used an executive order on his first day in office to reinstitute a pro-life policy that prevents forcing taxpayers to fund international groups that perform or promote abortions in other countries.
While U.S. law prohibits funding abortions directly, Bush's Mexico City Policy expands the law by also prohibiting the funding of pro-abortion groups that either do abortions overseas or lobby pro-life governments to sacrifice their abortion limits.
During the presidential election, pro-life groups issued a clarion call to voters telling them their tax money would be used if Obama were elected and saying he would likely reverse the Mexico City Policy immediately after taking office.
The capital publication Congressional Quarterly reports that top Washington officials tell it that the incoming president will reverse the pro-life measure on his first day as president, on Wednesday.
When Obama overturns the limits on global abortions, he will do so over the objections of dozens of members of Congress.
"As a new administration begins, it is our hope you will work, as you have pledged, to create a new era of bi-partisan cooperation. We urge you to continue the Mexico City Policy, which separates abortion and family planning in America's foreign aid programs," the bipartisan group of lawmakers wrote Obama on Friday.
They say the policy "ensures that United States family planning funds are not co-opted by groups who promote abortion as a method of family planning. Such activities would send a wrong message overseas that the United States promotes
abortion."
The members, led by Rep. Doug Lamborn of Colorado and Joe Pitts of Pennsylvania, also say it is "insulting" to other nations to promote pro-abortion groups that lobby them to overturn long-standing pro-life laws based on their culture and heritage.
"We also have a responsibility to respect the laws of many developing countries who have laws prohibiting or restricting abortion. It is an insult to fund organizations that are intent on overturning those laws by promoting the Western ideology of abortion on demand," they said.
Rep. Nita Lowey, a New York Democrat who sponsored legislation in Congress to reverse the provision, told CQ that somehow putting it in place endangers the health care people in third world nations receive.
But Douglas Johnson, the legislative director of National Right to Life, tells LifeNews.com the Mexico City Policy and Obama's reversing it is all about abortion.
Thus, it appears Obama's move will take money away from non-abortion groups that provide services to poor people in foreign nations.
"One effect of Obama's anticipated order will be to divert many millions of dollars away from groups that do not promote abortion, and into the hands of those organizations that are most militant in promoting abortion as a population-control method," Johnson explained.
"So, a president who not long ago told the American people that he wanted to reduce the number of abortions, is already effectively promoting the increased use of abortion as a means of population control," Johnson added.
President Reagan first put the Mexico City Policy in place and it is named for a population conference that took place in the Mexican capital in 1984 when he introduced it.
President George H.W. Bush continued the pro-life policy, President Clinton overturned it, and President George W. Bush kept it for eight years and threatened to veto any Congressional spending bill reversing it.
Under the Mexico City Policy, funding for family planning programs is not reduced.
We need more brave black people to speak the truth such as this. I hope all, and especially the black community will listen.
ReplyDeleteThe Obama team is exploiting ML King for propaganda purposes. But Obama doesn't REALLY believe in equality for all. So don't listen to the hype. Obama is not the answer to Dr. King's dream. Obama is more of a dream turned nightmare.
ReplyDeleteI'm listening even now as President Obama gives his speech after being sworn in as the 44th President of the United States. He presents himself as a sign of hope over fear and equality for all. But he offers no real solutions to our problems. He offers only divisiveness and discord. And he is not committed to the equality of all. As we continue to dump the bodies of unborn babies into dumpsters, his talk is just that - talk.
ReplyDeleteI'm as disapponted with Barack Obama as I am the entire Democratic Party. The Democrats have fully embraced abortion and homosexuality and there is no room at all in the Party for serious Christians. The Party has abandoned us.
ReplyDeleteObama was right. Change has come to Washington. We had a pro-life President. Now we have one who supports the culture of death.
ReplyDeleteChange isn't always good.
In his inaugural address, Mr. Obama leavened idealism with realism, reminding listeners that the nation is at war against "those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents."
ReplyDeleteDo take note---"those who seek to advance their aims--inducing terror and slaughtering innocents.
True, he is referring to acts of war and direct killing of innocent people by the terroist, but he who's aim is for the war on innocent life and the killing of that innocent life in the womb. How reconcile such a mentality?
The Obama radical culture of death machine didn't waste any time:
ReplyDeleteWashington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- In less than five minutes after Barack Obama took over as the next president, the White House web site changed from pro-life to pro-abortion. The previous site, which touted the pro-life proclamation President Bush signed late last week, now includes Obama's agenda for women, which calls for promoting abortion.
Gone is any mention of the Sanctity of Human Life Day or the speeches or actions of President Bush's that promoted human life. Now, in the same color scheme and format as the Bush site, there is a celebration of Obama's agenda.
According to a web site search of WhiteHouse.gov, the only page on the official governmental site to mention abortion is a page detailing what Obama will do to promote the interests of women.
Though abortions cause women a myriad of medical and mental health problems, Obama states his clear intent, in a section entitled "reproductive choice," to make abortions even more available.
"President Obama understands that abortion is a divisive issue, and respects those who disagree with him. However, he has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women's rights under Roe v. Wade a priority in his Adminstration [sic]," the Obama White House site says.
"He opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in that case," it adds.
The White House page also touts Obama's backing for the Prevention First Act.
Billed as a measure to provide more funding for family planning and contraception, pro-life advocates oppose it because it sends millions of dollars to Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion business that does 25 percent of the abortions across the country.
The Obama White House site also promotes the new president's view that Americans should be forced to pay for embryonic stem cell research, which involves the destruction of human life and has never helped a single patient.
The web site comes across as a false claim that government has not supported stem cell research in general, even though President Bush spent hundreds of millions of dollars promoting the use of adult stem cells -- the only kind to help any patients.
"President Obama and Vice President Biden believe that we owe it to the American public to explore the potential of stem cells to treat the millions of people suffering from debilitating and life-threatening diseases," the White House site says.
"Obama is a co-sponsor of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007, which will allow research of human embryonic stem cells derived from embryos donated (with consent) from in vitro fertilization clinics. These embryos must be deemed in excess and created based solely for the purpose of fertility treatment," it adds.
However, not all leftover embryos are deemed to be in excess as hundreds of babies have been born through the embryo adoption programs that exist nationwide.