Obama Pro-Abortion Litmus Test for Nominee? No (And Yes)

Home  »  Abortion  »  Obama Pro-Abortion Litmus Test for Nominee? No (And Yes)
Apr 21, 2010 3 Comments ›› Ben DuPré

Obama Pro-Abortion Litmus Test for Nominee? No (And Yes)

(http://www NULL.youtube NULL.com/watch?v=Cqww8jmizug)One of the popular metaphors used during the fight over judicial nominations to the Supreme Court is a “litmus test”—that is, whether the President will demand certain ideological commitments of his nominees before he would consider nominating them. President Obama today denied that he would use a litmus test (http://www NULL.foxnews NULL.com/politics/2010/04/20/obama-holds-talks-supreme-court-candidates/?test=latestnews) on the issue of so-called “abortion rights” or “any of these issues.” That is, until he said he would use a litmus test (http://www NULL.whitehouse NULL.gov/blog/2010/04/21/any-decisions-are-made).

Doing his best doublespeak impersonation, Obama first gave a reassurance of his own pro-abortion stance:

“You know, I am somebody who believes women should have the ability to make often very difficult decisions about their own bodies and issues of reproduction.”

Then the denial of a litmus test:

I don’t have litmus tests around any of these issues…”

Then the assurance that he would use a litmus test:

“… but I will say that I want somebody who is going to be interpreting our Constitution in a way that takes into account individual rights, and that includes women’s rights.”

“Part of what our core constitutional values promote is the notion that individuals are protected in their privacy and their bodily integrity, and women are not exempt from that.”

For those inclined to be satisfied with the “I don’t have litmus tests” line, please allow me to translate for you everything else Obama said there:

  • When Obama says “difficult decisions about their own bodies and issues of reproduction,” he means the right to choose abortion.
  • When Obama says “interpreting our Constitution in a way that takes into account individual rights, and that includes women’s rights,” he means the right to choose abortion as a constitutional right.
  • When Obama says that “our core constitutional values promote” the protection of women in “their privacy and their bodily integrity,” he means the right to choose abortion, again as a constitutional right.

By disclaiming a “litmus test” but yet sandwiching those buzzwords between all the pro-abortion code words he could cram into his statement, the President is trying to signal to his radical liberal base that the nominee will be pro-abortion while also hoping pro-life advocates will read only the “no litmus test” headline that indicates the opposite.  If it weren’t so Orwellian it would be amusing.

Obama has been the most pro-abortion President in American history. (See this LifeNews.com compilation (http://www NULL.lifenews NULL.com/obamaabortionrecord NULL.html) of pro-abortion acts by Obama for numerous examples.) In fact, even his recent Executive Order a few weeks ago that bought the crucial Bart Stupak bloc vote (http://morallaw NULL.org/blog/?p=1137) on the health care bill did nothing to change the abortion funding provisions of the bill, as even Planned Parenthood (http://www NULL.lifenews NULL.com/nat6175 NULL.html) gleefully made clear.

Something tells me Planned Parenthood is not concerned by Obama’s forked-tongue statement today either—but if anything, the pro-life community should be.

Share (http://www NULL.addtoany NULL.com/share_save)


  1. our founding truth (http://www NULL.ourfoundingtruth NULL.blogspot NULL.com) says:

    You’re off on this one administrator. George Bush is responsible, and will answer to the Lord, for at least 10 million murders in the womb; most likely more.

    Bush signed every health services bill for eight years straight, giving hundreds of thousands to planned parenthood. Yes, Obama is not a Christian; I never bought he was, but Bush is worse because he actually believes he’s a Christian.

    Bush declared, “all roads lead to God” violating I Tim 3:5, “There is one God and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.

    George Bush is actually a polytheist.

  2. Linda Templet says:

    There are NO RELIGIOUS TESTS in government for representatives. But are there any religious tests for making decisions as to how the nature of our representatives governs the natures of others?

    All government is to be run according to our Declaration of Independence concerning mans NATURE and how a nature should be governed in our country.

    If an object, such as abortion, does not line up with the Laws of Nature; hidden within the body of the HOLY BIBLE, and Natures God it gets thrown out of government. Simple as that.

    God is to be the Supreme Judge of Nature in our United States of America. How do I know that? Because his NAME is the only NAME mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. Our forefathers made Him the ruler over the NATURE of our country.

    We don’t see a body when we read the Bible do we? That is because the body does not matter–its just a place for NATURE to live.

    Let us make man in our image AFTER OUR LIKENESS. Well he sure made me after his likeness in nature. I am a godly natured person most of the time.

    Is our President Obamas image of NATURE made after the likeness of Gods or Jesus’s? Is his NATURE trying to govern our land according to the Nature of God by trying to present a law that goes completely against the NATURE of God or Jesus that allows a woman to have the right to kill her unborn child if she chooses just because it is in her body? Does that line up with Natures LAWS; the Holy Bible, or Natures God?

    Abortion does not line up with the Biblical Law of– Thou shalt not kill; therefore it is unconstitutional to kill an unborn living baby–period! Nature wants to kill this baby but God; the Soverign King of all Nature made a LAW to stop nature from doing their WILL. We must do the WILL of God–not ours. We must live under God Laws of Nature–not our laws of nature. That is constitutional!

    President OBAMA, don’t you think you should have also studied and understood the Declaration of Independence while you were studying the Constitution? But Sir, don’t feel bad. No one else understands what they are reading either. That is why our country is in such an ungodly MESS.

    But don’t worry Sir, with GOD all things are possible. It is even more possible to make a Divine Providence out of America once the NATURES of the people realize that we must abide by Gods LAWS or NATURE in order to have a good and right governing system.

  3. Emilia Palmer (http://www NULL.shower-cubicle NULL.org) says:

    we should ban all forms of abortion because it is not right to kill an unborn child;**

Leave a Reply

To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word