Blogs Comment On Obama's Notre Dame Speech, Gallup Poll On Abortion Views, Other Topics

Main Category: Women's Health / Gynecology
Also Included In: Abortion;  Sexual Health / STDs
Article Date: 20 May 2009 - 3:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

The following summarizes selected women's health-related blog entries.

~ "Nine Key Developments in Obama's Notre Dame Speech," Dan Gilgoff, U.S. News & World Report's God and Country: When speaking at the University of Notre Dame's commencement ceremony Sunday, President Obama "devoted a good-sized chunk of the address to confronting the basis for the controversy" surrounding his invitation to speak "head on," Gilgoff writes. He goes on to list nine key points in the speech, including Obama's decisions to acknowledge the controversy surrounding his appearance at the commencement; highlight his policy proposals of increasing adoption availability and assistance to pregnant women who carry pregnancies to term, which "go way beyond pregnancy prevention;" and voice his support for "drafting a sensible conscience clause," which represents a step away from completely rescinding the Bush administration provider "conscience" rule. Gilgoff writes that Obama also "argued, despite his hopes of achieving common ground around the hottest-button issue, the two sides in the abortion debate really are at loggerheads," adding that his statement was "incongruous with a speech that argued common ground is always possible between ideological combatants." Gilgoff also discusses media coverage of the event and the fact that "Obama never stated his pro-abortion-rights position," which likely will "rile" abortion-rights advocates. In addition, Obama "peppered his speech with shows of respect for those on the other side of the issue," according to Gilgoff. Lastly, Obama addressed the moral issue surrounding abortion, which "represents a break from Democrats who, for a long time, declined to do so," but also spoke on other moral and religious issues beyond abortion -- an important move "because most religious Americans don't see their faith mostly in terms of stopping abortion" (Gilgoff, U.S. News & World Report's God and Country, 5/18).

~ "Has the Public Become More Opposed to Abortion?" John Sides, The Monkey Cage: Recently released polls from Gallup and the Pew Research Center were based on "hopelessly mushy" questions, and the "findings obscure far more than they reveal," Sides writes. The Gallup data showed that the percentage of people who said they are "pro-life" has risen and is larger than the percentage who calls themselves "pro-choice." The Pew data showed a decline in the percentage of people who think abortion should be legal in "all" or "most" cases, with an increase in the percentage of people who think it should be illegal in all or most cases. However, "a wider array of data do not appear to show notable trends," and the "movement appears to be among Republicans," Sides writes, adding that the two research groups "purport to show shifts in opinion that are not evident in other data." The two groups "employ vague questions that do not easily map onto actual policy debates," he continues, concluding, "Once more precise data are employed, it becomes clear that opinion strongly depends on the circumstances under which the abortion would occur" (Sides, The Monkey Cage, 5/16).

~ "Discussion: Obama at Notre Dame," Washington Post's On Faith: The Washington Post's On Faith blog posted several entries regarding President Obama's speech at the University of Notre Dame's commencement ceremony. Susan Brooks Thistlewaite, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, writes that she "appreciated" that Obama's speech "acknowledged that women are the central decision makers" when it comes to abortion "and that women engage in moral reasoning to make the decision." However, this has "kept religious authorities from making the connection between insights from the history of ethics and the abortion question." Brian McLaren, an evangelical pastor, writes that the speech "was an example of the kind of respectful discourse we need when grappling with issues over which we disagree, while author Susan Jacoby says that the speech and reaction from the audience "will have a long-term impact on the larger abortion debate ... not because there is 'common ground' for everyone, but because of the emphasis on civility and respect for opposing points of view." Willis Elliot, a minister with the United Church of Christ, calls the speech "an honest, masterful, Hail Mary bypass of all the phrases [Obama's] 'pro-life' enemies might use as banners against him." According to John Mark Reynolds, a professor of philosophy for Biola University, the speech was a "very bad speech in that it pretended to be one thing when it was something else," as Obama "spoke as if the controversy centered on his appearance at Notre Dame and speech when, in reality, it centered on his being honored despite his views" on abortion. Albert Mohler, the former editor of The Christian Index, writes that the speech was "a moral evasion and an insult to the importance of the issue," adding, "If President Obama had actually spoken of abortion itself ... he would have found himself defending the indefensible, which explains why he avoids this discussion at all costs" (Washington Post's On Faith, 5/18-5/19).

~ "Bravo President Obama," Sarah Brown, RH Reality Check: President Obama's recently released fiscal year 2010 budget proposal has "many, many good qualities" regarding teen pregnancy prevention, Brown writes, adding that it "emphasizes good science, encourages research and innovation and increases the overall investment in prevention, too-early pregnancy and parenthood." The budget proposal is "firmly on the side of science" and "contains the first-ever significant funding for preventing teen pregnancy prevention that is not dedicated to abstinence-only interventions," she continues. Brown adds that the teen pregnancy prevention proposals included in the budget are "simply part of the president's broader commitment to spending tax payer dollars on research, evaluation, innovation and proven interventions" (Brown, RH Reality Check, 5/18).

~ "On Those New Stats on Abortion and U.S. Public Opinion," Feministe: People who say they are "pro-life" do not "necessarily mean they want abortion to be illegal," Feministe writes in reaction to a recent Gallup poll, adding, "They say it because they personally think that abortion is wrong, and therefore don't want to be associated with it, despite the fact that they feel that each woman should get to make her own choice. And that, of course, is what we call 'pro-choice.'" The blog continues that the results from certain questions in the poll are "a whole lot more significant" than others, particularly the question of whether abortion should be legal under all circumstances, most circumstances, a few circumstances or illegal in all circumstances. Responses showed that a "vast majority think that [abortion] should be legal in at least some circumstances," the blog says, adding that the terms could mean "totally different things" to different people. The "fact that only 23% of Americans want to see a total ban says that" abortion-rights advocates are doing well, the blog says, adding, "We just need to do better." It concludes that "the fact that most Americans want some kind of restrictions placed on abortion isn't exactly something to cheer. And it's absolutely something to work to change. The thing is that it's just not the news most people are suggesting it is. To the contrary, Americans have unfortunately supported those restrictions for a long time" (Feministe, 5/15).

~ "Cases the New Supreme Court Justice May Face," Kay Steiger, RH Reality Check: "An important consideration related to who ultimately" replaces retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter "centers on what issues the Supreme Court would face in the near future," Steiger writes in an entry that examines some of the possibilities. Steiger writes that cases currently in state or appellate courts that may appear before the Supreme Court include those involving fetal personhood amendments; abortion bans; required ultrasound viewing before abortions; and pharmacist refusal legislation. The next justice on the Supreme Court, "whoever that might be, will be facing important decisions about how women access reproductive health care," Steiger writes, adding that Obama may "appoint ... someone who is 'Souter or better' on women's rights" (Steiger, RH Reality Check, 5/18).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

• Additional
• References
• Citations