Obama says abortion query “above his pay grade

I fully support McCain over Obama for other reasons, but I think Obama's answer was the better one on this question.

We all have our own opinions on the exact time that a fertilized egg becomes a person, with full human rights. The most popular opinion to express out loud, particularly on forums like these that tend towards the more "socially conservative" views, is that life simply begins at conception. However, many of our wives of childbearing age use birth control pills, which act by flushing the fertilized eggs from the uterus. These are chemically induced very early abortions, like it or not.

And we don't usually conduct funeral services for the flushed fetus, largely because we don't usually even know for sure that a fertilized egg has been expelled in the normal monthly process.

And on the other end of the spectrum, even those of us who are pro-choice are usually against partial-birth abortions, unless absolutely medically necessary for the physical survival of the mother.

Somewhere between the meeting of the sperm and the egg and the passage through the birth canal, there comes a point that would more honestly satisfy most people's definition of the real beginning of human life. The timing or stage of development that satisfies the requirement obviously varies with each individual deciding that question according to their own conscience and values. We can all be quite sure that our definition is the right one, yet they can vary from one extreme to the other.

Like many other questions that we all have to decide for ourselves, this one has become increasingly polarized in recent years. And like many of the others, the answer that many of us are most comfortable with lies between the extremes.

The great thing about freedom is that we can follow our own moral compass and our own conscience within certain limits. If we are among those who believe that a person is a person when an egg meets up with a sperm cell that she likes, then we can act to follow that belief in our own life decisions, without forcing our actions on others who see it differently, just as we can refrain from the use of alcohol if we believe it to be an evil, without bringing back prohibition.

Russ, I am a huge fan of never using 100 words to say what can be said in 10 ..... however, I usually enjoy your posts. You have a way with words.

btw - agree with your post.

I'm not a fan of birth control pills either, and Obama's answer still does not impress me. Stand for something Obama you coward, even if people disagree with it. Pay grade, give me a break.

Doc, we've also had losses shortly after live births and stillborns well into the pregnancy in the extended family, and they were felt as live losses and treated that way, too.

My comment above was in regard to the very early losses that usually aren't even recognized as having occurred because they are gone prior to the realization of their existence. They are still human life, even if they're only a few cells and haven't made their presence known yet.

I probably contributed to a misunderstanding by the misuse of the term "fetus" when the more accurate designation for the first stage after conception would be "zygote".

Point being that if we literally treat those first few cells as humans with full human rights, legally, then any woman on the pill is more than likely a serial killer, and those supplying the pills are guilty of being accessories to murder. Do we really believe that to be the case? It has to be so if we take the position of legal human rights beginning at conception, doesn't it?

There is no argument that those first few cells multiplying in the womb aren't life, and there's no logical way to argue that they aren't human. The debate is over the point at which they are developed to the extent that they should be legally recognized as a person.

I think we are being dragged into extreme positions that most of us don't really completely support, because anything less seems wishy-washy or without backbone when compared on open forums to the extremist positions at either end of the spectrum. We have to be either "fer it or agin it" 110%, when lots of us more privately are probably more like 60-40 for or against, or for/against whatever it is, but with some exceptions.

Most other things in life are like that. We don't want a dress code, but we agree to ban public nudity. We treasure our freedom of speech, but with restrictions against slander or yelling "Fire!" in a theater, etc. We enjoy our free enterprise sysem, but we do want a certain amount of consumer protection.

I suspect that if we ever come to agreement as a society regarding full rights for the unborn, it will be closer to banning late-term abortion than it is to the "zygotes-are-people-too" stance that's currently politically popular but logically untenable.

Debating the matter amongst ourselves is pointless, because it's not the issue. The pastor simply asked for Obama's opinion on the matter so the voters would be educated as to his position and could make an informed voting decision based on his answer. He didn't answer. He ducked the question plain and simple.

"It's above my pay grade" ia a wonderful catch phrase that will become very popular this election cycle IMO.

Considering his lack of experience I would say EVERYTHING is "above his paygrade"..

Are you saying that just because there isn't a funeral when someone dies, the person who died somehow isn't a person? Regardless of whether or not a funeral is held, a miscarriage represents a death, and those having miscarriages mourn the loss of their less developed children. What families do about the loss after someone dies is a personal decision. And yes, as someone who has protested publicly against abortion since childhood, you can be darn sure I fully believe what I wrote.

P.S. About in-vitro fertilization--I disagree with the way it is carried out. I know the chances of having a viable pregnancy increase with the number of fertilized and implanted eggs, but I would rather one be fertilized and implanted at a time. I don't think it's ethical to kill 8 children just so you can have a better chance that one develops in a healthy manner.