Hey, Obama, why do you think clergy have any authority to help women make decisions on abortion?

[More Than A Feeling]

[peacebird]

1. that shocked me too

[Ethelk2044]

3. Some Women do talk to their Minister

That is the reason why he said that. Not everyone try to keep it a secret. Those women who want to talk to their Pastors seek advise from them.

[ultraist]

78. Obama is pandering to the religious community

That comment obviously crosses or nearly crosses seperation of church and state and is very disrespectful to women.

It shouldn't even be suggested within the law or the political arena, that women are to be encouraged or forced to consult with clergy with regard to their decison regarding abortion.

[FrenchieCat]

123. Pandering? That's ironic!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3236541&mesg_id=3237207

[Captain_Nemo]

5. I am not watching the debates yet but Obama is very into the religious types in this country.

I can see why he would say that.

[JDPriestly]

27. I haven't seen the debate, but that is a real turn-off for me.

I belong to a minority religion. Obama has a Christian bias. I don't have a problem with Christianity at all, but I want a president who is as blind to religion as he or she is to race.

[Colobo]

41. Edwards said Jesus was his moral compass

Is that a turn off for you?

[fuzzyball]

48. YES...as a non-devout hindu, I dislike Christianity thrown around

in my face. Religion is a private matter and the president
is for ALL the people. Keep the freaking religion out of
national politics.

[rep the dems]

120. Exactly. So what's wrong with him saying that God/Jesus is what guides

him personally? He's not saying he's going to see to it that everyone follows Christian morals and reads the Bible. That's the Republicans' goal.

[fuzzyball]

124. Exactly why I am not a republican....too much Jesus

As I said, president is for all people. Religion, God &
Church/Temple/Mosque are private matters. It is offensive
for a person of different religion to have to listen to
Jesus thrown around. Do it privately and you will have my
respect as a God fearing person. I don't believe in Jesus
and my religion was created 2000 years before Jesus even
existed, and I am tired of the Jesus freaks.

[rep the dems]

126. Not everyone who believes in God is a "Jesus freak."

And I think it's awfully close-minded of you to refer to Edwards as one when all he said was that his lord was his moral leader, and probably wouldn't have even mentioned God if he hadn't been asked that question.

[fuzzyball]

127. When Edwards mentioned "lord" who do you think he was

referring to? Is he a christian or not? And who
exactly is this "lord" person in christianity?

[rep the dems]

135. So you do think everyone who believes in God is a Jesus Freak.

I find that incredibly offensive.

[fuzzyball]

137. Huge difference between God & Jesus

Jesus was just a human being. God is....well the Almighty!

[JDPriestly]

49. No. He is talking for himself. He is not offering that to prove he is a good guy.

Each of us has our own ideas about religion. If that is Edwards' view, that is great. It would not be right to suggest that having Jesus as your moral compass makes you better than others or is the way it should be. Jesus said that you should not pray loudly to impress others but go into a closet and pray quietly. To follow the moral compass of Jesus means you do not push your religion on others. To me it is not pushy to talk about your own experience, but it is pushy to assume that everyone agrees with you or to empower your religion over the religions of others.

[donsu]

58. it turns me off

nt

[Morgana LaFey]

125. Yes, he sponsored a bill (or amendment) to let bankruptcy filers

exempt their tithes to their churches.

:eyes:

[sandnsea]

23. A woman, her doctor and her God

Democrats have been saying that forever. What's the shock now???

[razzleberry]

50. a doctor is just a auto mechanic, but for humans

I don't understand why anybody gives a doctor any
special authority over there personal life as an ...

advisor in matters concerning
morality
ethics
or
spirituality.

[sandnsea]

51. A doctor performs the abortion

A doctor makes the diagnosis that requires a late term abortion.

Of course a doctor has to be involved.

[Kber]

55. Same reason you ask you automechanic when you need your brakes changed

My doctor recently advised me that another pregnancy could be life threatening and she would recommend having an abortion if I accidently got pregnent.

It's not a moral or ethical recommendation - it's a "mechanical" one which she is completely qualified to make.

I might talk to my rabbi about it, I might not,but that's up to me.

There is a big difference between having the personal choice in who I consult and having it legally mandidated. Was Obama suggesting that I be legally required to discuss any potential abortion with my rabbi? I doubt it.

[Colobo]

2. Many women in this country

go to church and listen to their pastors/reverends/etc.

[ultraist]

79. And many women don't

Many of us don't need to consult with religious clergy (99% of whom are men) to make well informed decisions over our own bodies. Please.

[Connie_Corleone]

4. Some women go to their clergy to get advice on abortion.

He wasn't speaking about ALL women.

People get so panicky around here if someone mentions anything religious.

[More Than A Feeling]

8. Some people get panicky at the mere thought of being associated with atheism.

Take a look down-thread. Being pro-choice is somehow less valuable if it means that the position is associated with a strong critique of religion. You can't discuss choice without pointing out the overall negative effect of supernaturalism on the debate. To think otherwise is to bury one's head in the sand.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

29. You pretty much can't have a debate about it without religion coming up

Most antis cite spiritual and theological concepts in their arguments. I've met a few forced birther atheists, but not many. They tend to be male and libertarian-ish (well, except in that one area). But for the most part, people who oppose abortion do so because they believe it is a violation of a religious edict. Many believe that a fertilized egg possesses a unique "soul".

[pnwmom]

6. There isn't a uniform clergyman's position on abortion.

A friend of mine had an abortion in college, and her father, who was a pastor of a church ,supported her.

Obama's just recognizing that women make this decision in the total context of their lives and for some women, that includes religious beliefs.

[RevCheesehead]

40. Or a clergywoman, either.

There are at least 3 of us here at DU. :hi:

[Critters2]

46. Thank you!

Took the words out of my mouth!

[cmkramer]

64. The hearings during the Clinton Administration

I remember one of the women who spoke out in favor was a pro-life Catholic. She said that even after she learned about the fetus's anomolies she was still against the idea of abortion. She and her husband consulted with their priest and they decided that a D&E was the best option for them.

[earthlover]

7. I have been arguing for years that the decision to have an abortion...

...is between a woman and her clergy and NOT that of the government.

Is in necessary to knock clergy too? Come on, it is not the government's decision, and...this is a real hard stretch for some I guess....some women would want to consult their clergy in the matter.

The right wing wants to brand anyone who is pro-choice as being anti-religion. Need to counter that.

[More Than A Feeling]

9. Of course the government doesn't have the authority. But why would clergy?

What is their authority based on?

I'm pro-choice, and I'm anti-supernaturalism. I'm not afraid to say it. Why does the right's criticism make you want to hide non-believers in the closet somewhere? Are you ashamed to have atheists in the Democratic Party?

[polmaven]

16. I don't recall that the Senator came anywhere near

declaring that clergy had to sign a permission slip for an abortion to make it legal.

As was stated in an earlier post, many women speak with their religious leaders in many different circumstances, for many different reasons. Their counsel is not always even for the religious slant on the question. Many people turn to their clergy persons just for good, sound, UNBIASED AND NON-JUDGMENTAL discussion. Yes, I did say non-judgmental.

You are obviously not a believer. I respect that view and you have every right to it.

I am a believer. I would hope that you would respect my right to hold that view.

[earthlover]

20. do people have a choice on whether or not to be religious too?

Or is it just plain unacceptable to believe in a supernatural being? Well....believe it or not....some women actually believe in god. And if they want to consult clergy, what is wrong with that?

Acknowledging this is politically smart. The far right wants to make pro-choice people out as attacking religion and they use this to score "points". Obama shows that religious people can and do discuss abortions. Which, to my way of thinking, is smart politics.

The republicans have won many an election because of "values", which is a joke looking at the characters of some of them, but they have worn religion on their sleeve and it has worked. Many of the left have actually helped them along, by saying things opposed to religion or shunning religion. Which is no way to win over moderates, many of whom are religious, especially in the swing states.

So being able to express positive thoughts about religion---not the right wing brand---can help win over moderates....even some of these moderates who are not sold on choice to vote for someone who is pro-choice instead of brissling at the idea.

[mzteris]

10. wrong

it's a decision between a woman and her DOCTOR (and *maybe* the father, depending on the circumstances. ) and - if she's a believer - her "GOD" (which in essence is her conscious.)

CLERGY should have nothing to do with it.

IMHO If she's too brainless to make her own decision, she's probably too brainless to be raising a kid.

[earthlover]

24. so why don't we ban clergy and remove a woman's choice to see one?

After all, you think she is brainless if she sees one. Now that is a real positive view towards women. Brainless? Really? And a clergy should have NOTHING to do with it.

I suppose other than the fact that you think clergy should have nothing to do with a woman's decision and she is brainless for consulting one, you don't have anything against women or the clergy.

Gees, women can decide for themselves whether they want to consult clergy without you calling them brainless for making the wrong decision, that is, the one that contradicts your decision as to what is good for her.

[illinoisprogressive]

11. I talked to my family preist when deiciding on whether to abort for medical

I was very torn and it helped me alot.

[More Than A Feeling]

13. I glad you were helped in a tough spot. As you brought it up, might I ask what you were torn about?

Was it about whether God would approve of you aborting?

[illinoisprogressive]

12. I had to decide on aborting due to medical and consulted with my priest

it helped an awful lot

[FrenchieCat]

14. I don't believe that Obama was making it be an authoritarian kind of statement.....

But many who believe in a woman's right to choose also believe that this is a choice that a woman should make in consultation with whomever she deems to be important in her life. Many women consider their religion important.....and so yes, if a woman wants to consult her clergy, she should.

It ain't like a doctor has any greater authority....because performing the procedure gives one no more authority than anyone else the women chooses. I don't believe that women should have to ask doctors for permission anymore than they should have to ask their Clergy. Consultation doesn't mean asking permission to. So I'm not sure why Obama's inclusion of Clergy considering that this country which is predominantly Christian to be something that he shouldn't have said. Color me confused in your obvious objection! :shrug:

[More Than A Feeling]

15. Nobody's saying she can't. I'm questioning the basis of the authority of the clergy

and why Obama felt the need to underline that supposed authority. Why is the issue of abortion a religious one? That's what I want to know.

[More Than A Feeling]

18. Then let me restate: Why is abortion a religious question?

By throwing the clergy in there, Obama specifically cast it as a religious issue, and I want to know why?

[grizmaster]

Obama didn't cast it as a specifically religious issue

he merely affirmed that to many women faith and their chosen religious tradition is part of how the woman weighs important life decisions.

[FrenchieCat]

21. Because it is a religious question for many, even if that doesn't include you.....

"Abortion" is a moral question and oftentimes also a religious issue for many who have had to "decide" what they should do . Maybe not for you....but there are many others who aren't like you.

One of the ways that many in the religious community (I'm a minister's wife) are able to support a women's right to choose is by emphasizing that God will judge, not us.

I find nothing wrong with his answer having included one's clergy......at all. I don't believe he was making it a "requirement" nor was his giving Clergy the authority to make the determination for those who might come to them.

This objection that you are voicing is a red herring!

[More Than A Feeling]

31. Agreed, it is a moral question.

but if you frame it as a religious issue, then the question becomes "How do you know what god will and will not do?" What if god expects you to judge? This is why I am asking, because I honestly don't know how ministers have anything to say about gods, if they know no more about gods than the rest of us?

Do ministers know more about gods than the rest of us and what gods expect when it comes to abortion?

[FrenchieCat]

34. Ministers may be or may not be any more "moral" than anyone else....

...because in fact, we are all nothing much more than filthy rags (sinners) to begin with according to most religions. Churches are hospitals for the soul, not a place to find perfection.

I will say that the more intellectual Ministers have a tendency to be very well educated. My Husband is currently getting his masters in Theology, and already has a law degree and an MBA. I edit some of his papers, and yes, there is a lot to know, that many don't know about religion; christology, Pneumotolgy, Eschatology, Ecclesiology, Paterology, and Hamartiology; as well as many other doctrines, etc...

Bottomline is that we should all be free to "choose" and to "consult" whomever we so determine are the folks we want to consult. Barack Obama agrees.

[More Than A Feeling]

35. All those "ologies" you mentioned.

I haven't studied those, so I am going to trust you to tell me more about them. Particularly, this: are those the studies of what other people have thought about gods, or the study of actual gods? If they are the later, how exactly does one go about studying gods?

I agree with the freedom to consult whomever you like, I'm just not convinced that consulting clergy has more value than consulting anyone else. Especially when so many clergy are on the anti-choice side.

[FrenchieCat]

38. A google will provide you with what you need to know.......as I have never been one to

feel the need to "educate" others on the various studies of God (there is only one in the book that I go by).

You really don't "have to" be convinced of anything......in terms of who is considered valuable to whom in consultation when facing what one might consider a moral issue. That's the beauty of being pro-choice; we allow those who it affects to choose what they desire (and oftentimes, Clergy is in the mix).

Just read the responses you got to your thread.

[sandnsea]

26. Where ya' been???

What do you think has driven the abortion debate for the last 30+ years??

80%, or more, of Americans either believe in a God or are religious.

[donsu]

59. I think it is less then 80%

where did you get your stats?

[sandnsea]

74. It's 91%, actually

87% identify with a specific religion

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17879317/site/newsweek/

[donsu]

84. I'd like to know where they did the poling - how was it worded?

nt

[sandnsea]

103. What difference does it make?

The way vast majority of Americans believe in some sort of God. The exact figure really doesn't matter. 70..80..90.. It's a BUNCH. That's reality. That's who candidates are talking to.

[mnhtnbb]

17. Not a question of authority. Simply a person of counsel.

[grizmaster]

19. the same reason family would have "authority"

that being, those who the woman chose to help her make her decision.

I think Obama made it clear that choice should be in the hands of the woman and those she freely chose to aid her in her decision.

[sandnsea]

22. Now this is really reaching

You're picking at him over something that Democrats have been saying for at least a decade???

[FrenchieCat]

25. That's why I said I was confused upthread......

I guess to those who are not religious, no one should be either! :eyes:

[More Than A Feeling]

28. You roll your eyes, but whether anyone should believe in supernaturalism is a serious question.

That's a separate question from whether people have the right to be religious (of course they do!).

[FrenchieCat]

30. Do you have something to say about Edwards' Moral leader being

The Lord, too? :shrug:

Again, not everyone is you. Some believe in something greater than themselves, and if they choose to seek counsel from their Clergy, so be it. Why is seeking counsel from a doctor any better? Please tell me.

"We're against abortion, but I think they haven't gone far enough to provide for all cases. It should be between a woman and her God and her doctor, without the government interfering."
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1012/p01s01-uspo.html

You get rid of the the religious sector that believes that abortion is between a woman, her doctor, her family and her clergy, and the pro-choice movement becomes a minority movement.

[More Than A Feeling]

33. I'm an Edwards supporter, but his religion is not the reason.

When did I say anything about getting rid of anyone? Are you saying that if the "religious sector" suddenly somehow became non-religious, they'd stop being pro-choice?

Her doctor might not give advice based on a deity that nobody actually knows anything about.

[FrenchieCat]

36. I'll respectfully will agree to disagree with you, the tone of your headline,

and your double standards set for Obama and Edwards...and what each is allowed to say and not to say; about the Lord being one's "Moral leader" vs. a woman's right to consult her clergy about a moral issue such as abortion.

[Colobo]

43. Good post. It is a double standard indeed.

[Cameron27]

80. Agree...double standard.

[donsu]

60. agree

nt

[Honeycombe8]

32. As a woman who has been preggers & who's known preggers women....

it is not unusual at all for a woman to consult with her minister over any personal issue.

They are often sources of comfort and advice.

Who would possibly have a problem with that? ???????

[terisan]

42. Big difference between consulting or making joint decision

To me the decision is the right of the indivual to make--there is and should not be a requirement upon her to consult with a "clergy". I did not hear the debate so do not know Obama's exact words---If he said it was a decision between a woman and her clergy he is wrong . It is her decision. She may consult with whomever she pleases. The is and should not be any requirement for her to involve a person representing organized religion.

[Critters2]

47. I'm sure he didn't mean "requirement"

I'm the same denomination as Obama, and clergy in our tradition can't "require" anything of anyone. No one can. We value freedom of conscience.

But that doesn't mean we don't go to one another when we feel burdened with a diffcult choice, looking for comfort, support, and maybe even advice. But no one is required to take that advice.

[murielm99]

52. Support is the key word here,

IMHO.

When I considered an abortion, I went to my clergyman, among others. He told me I would have his support, and he was sure that I would have the support of the congregation, too.

I felt that if I needed to make that decision, I would need some support.

If abortion is a choice, we need to be able to choose whom we discuss this with as well.

[terisan]

65. I think the choice of "clergy" was a choice on his part.

I think it is slippery slope language. To me, It is a woman's choice period. You may involve whomever you choose. I may involve whomever I choose or no one---

If it was politically calculated language as some here have suggested, I have less respect for this candidate. I would like to have him elaborate on why he chose to mention participation of clergy. If he is intending that there is a spiritual aspect to such choices for some people, or a role for representatives of organized religion, I would like to hear that directly such as, "Some women may want to involve clergy in their decisionmaking, others may want to involve counselors, or family and friends".

As abortion is a medical procedure in the US, women can be arrested for aborting without a physician's services. There is a young female immigrant who has been arrested recently for a method common in her home country.

If Obama's statement was putting clergy on the same level as physicians, I think it careless or a danger to the rights of women.


When Bush was a candidate in 2000, his supporter's were always interpreting what he said through the lens of their own belief systems. I think this candidate needs to elaborate on his choice of words.

[donsu]

61. me - what kind of training do these ministers have in order to

counsel women on anything other then the religion they preach on?

[terisan]

63. Good point--many have little training. nt

[Critters2]

66. self-delete. posted twice for some reason

[Critters2]

67. Clergy have training in ethical theory

and many women consider social and religious ethics of their tradition when making such a decision. Clergy help them to gather that info.

[More Than A Feeling]

89. Wouldn't that be ethics based on what a supernatural creator entity wants?

How do you train in that? Especially when, even if we did know of such a thing, and even if it did prescribe a code of ethics, it could change its mind tomorrow, and all that training would go out the window.

[Critters2]

91. We are trained within out tradition. Are you suggesting we shouldn't

have the right to practice our tradition? That's progressive.

[More Than A Feeling]

95. Are you are more concerned with preserving your tradition than

whether or not supernatural ideas are actually necessary to help people?

[Critters2]

100. I know you don't agree, but we see our tradition as helping people

And please don't attack me by attacking fundies. I'm not a conservative Christian. And, believe it or not, there are those who believe this tradition is helpful to them. Your hostility notwithstanding.

[More Than A Feeling]

104. I'm saying you can help people without buying into supernatural ideas

Ethics training does not require pneumatology. But pneumatology and like studies are what make clergy "special". Otherwise, you'd all be just people with training in counseling. Which is fine, and great, and it helps people...and has nothing to do with the supernatural.

Supernatural ideas give unearned authority. Many clergy are great people who are surely capable of earning that authority on their own. I'm saying they ought to, and give up the supernatural.

[Critters2]

106. You can't be respectful of people's sincere belief in what you call

"supernatural"? See, that's my problem. The lack of respect.

[More Than A Feeling]

109. Lack of respect for ideas that haven't earned it. Not lack of respect for people.

Big difference. Confusing the two only attempts to shield the ideas from the critique that all ideas must go through.

[earthlover]

128. Wow! What intolerance!!!!

So "clergy" ought to give up the supernatural. Now, if someone came on here and said "atheists" ought to give up their non-belief in the supernatural there would be hell to pay!!!

Why is it that you cannot accept people having other views on religious matters than your own viewpoint? I am a Christian, an extremely liberal one, but I could not relate to looking down on someone else's religious views. I might not agree with them but it just seems ODD to me to see fundies getting bent out of shape over the views of others and calling them sinners, etc in direct contradiction to the Bible's mandate not to judge. It makes me even more bewildered to see people get bent out of shape that people believe in god .

Saying clergy shouldn't believe in god is like saying biologists shouldn't believe in evolution! It's what clergy do! Funny how left meets right when they try to force others to share their viewpoints instead of accepting differences.

[More Than A Feeling]

129. It all comes down to evidence.

If you've got some for the supernatural, let's have it. If not, then you aren't justified in believing in the supernatural any more than I am in believing that the streets will be paved with solid gold when I wake up tomorrow morning. And neither are clergy.

The reason it seems odd for fundamentalists getting bent out of shape is because they have so far failed to present evidence for their supernatural ideas, and so they have no basis for criticism when other people come up with similarly baseless supernatural ideas.

Biologists have evidence for evolution, clergy have as of yet failed to present evidence for gods. That its "what they do" doesn't make it right.

It's time for the taboo that protects supernatural ideas from being challenged for lack of evidence to fall.

[earthlover]

133. evidence not proof

Religious people can and do present evidence to support their view that god exists and nonreligious people can and do present evidence to support their view that god does not exists.

What you fail to have a handle on is that NOBODY can totally prove this issue one way or the other. We only have beliefs. Athiesm is a belief. It is not a fact. Christianity, and all other religions, are beliiefs. Not a fact. The belief in god is just that.

I do find it frustrating when people, faced with the issue of god, act as if they have found "the" answer and deny others the respect that springs from recognizing that they also have their views on the subject. To me, this is one of the largest problems with fundamentalism.

However, on this board I have seen a similar mind-set among some nonreligious folks. They are right, they have the answer, people who believe otherwise are idiots, and now the clergy lacks any authority to speak and shouldn't hold their beliefs in the "supernatural".

Get over it. You are attempting the impossible. You can't prove that god doesn't exist any more than anyone can prove god does exist. It is unprovable. We all have an opinion on the subject which will get us a cup of coffee if we add a couple of bucks.

So if someone wants to discuss an issue with their clergy what is wrong with that?

[More Than A Feeling]

136. I'm serious, if you know of some evidence for the existence of gods

let's have it. If anyone knows of any evidence, I want it.

nonreligious people can and do present evidence to support their view that god does not exists.

The burden of persuasion is on those making the claim that gods exist. If it were otherwise, if I had to persuade you that gods don't exist, think of how many claims I could make that you would have to believe if you couldn't prove them false, even if I had no evidence whatsoever to support my claim.

What you fail to have a handle on is that NOBODY can totally prove this issue one way or the other.

Exactly, and so the issue should be decided against the side with the burden of persuasion.

We only have beliefs. Athiesm is a belief. It is not a fact. Christianity, and all other religions, are beliiefs. Not a fact. The belief in god is just that.

Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. You yourself probably do not believe in many of the gods that have been proposed in the past.

I do find it frustrating when people, faced with the issue of god, act as if they have found "the" answer and deny others the respect that springs from recognizing that they also have their views on the subject. To me, this is one of the largest problems with fundamentalism.

In so many other areas of life, people praise evidence, and making one's knowledge as accurate as possible. When it comes to gods, evidence and accuracy go out the window, and it becomes "whatever works for you". Why is that?

However, on this board I have seen a similar mind-set among some nonreligious folks. They are right, they have the answer, people who believe otherwise are idiots, and now the clergy lacks any authority to speak and shouldn't hold their beliefs in the "supernatural".

Have you considered not binding your identity to supernatural ideas? You wouldn't have to feel so insulted when they are challenged. You could defend them or change them, like any other ideas. It isn't the fault of non-religious people that you have chosen to bind your identity in that way.

As for the clergy, they do not have authority in so far as they base their pronouncements on supernatural claims. Beyond that, they have whatever authority they can earn by their other learning and their deeds, and it is right that they should have that particular part of their authority.

Get over it. You are attempting the impossible. You can't prove that god doesn't exist any more than anyone can prove god does exist. It is unprovable. We all have an opinion on the subject which will get us a cup of coffee if we add a couple of bucks.

I agree, I can't prove gods don't exist. But like I said before, the burden of persuasion is on those who claim that they do.

So if someone wants to discuss an issue with their clergy what is wrong with that?

People can choose whomever they like. But I don't think you will deny that part of the reason why they choose clergy are the supernatural claims that clergy make. Life decisions are hard enough without worrying about what inscrutable supernatural creator entities want.

[earthlover]

140. the burden of persuasion is on the one criticising others

Seems to me that the point you were making was that clergy lack authority, should not believe in the supernatural, etc. So if you are going to make such strident claims, the burden of proof or persuasion is on you, since you are basing your stridency on the assumption that god does not exist.

And the original topic of this post was criticising Obama for recognizing that women may want to consult their clergy on life issues such as abortion. If you are going to criticize, the burden of persuasion is on you.

Since I am perfectly happy letting atheists believe the way they do and I accept the views of religious people also, I don't feel the need to have a burden of persuasion in the first place, since I am happy not to persuade them from their beliefs! If a woman wants to talk to their clergy about an abortion I am not going to object and if she doesn't want to consult the clergy I am happy with that too. Se la vie.

You say atheism is an absense of belief. That may be true of agnosticism, but atheism is the belief that there is no god, which is an affirmative belief. In any case, if you are going to criticise religion and clergy, the burden of persuasion is on you...and in this case you can't disprove the existence of god any more than someone can prove god exists.

So my position, that is, respecting the fact that others have different views on the subject than I do instead of attacking them, is the position that does not require the burden of proof. On a topic that cannot be proven, it is also the most logical position to take.

As to evidence of god existing, there is no evidence that a religious person could give that would persuade an atheist that there is a god any more than an atheist could persuade a fundamentalist that there isn't. There are folks who see the beauty of our planet and the miracle of love and any of a whole host of miracles and use this as "evidence" of god...which of course is not scientific but to them it is evidence enough. For that matter, there have been many scientists who also believe in god, and people from every walk of life, intelligence level, and belief structure. Furthermore, there are almost as many conceptions of god as believers!

I see no particular point in presenting "evidence" one way or the other, because in the final analysis no amount of evidence could prove the question one way or another. If you take the position that god does not exist, more power to you! I have no problem with that. It is not me who is trying to say atheism is stupid, that atheists lack authority to voice their opinions, or that people are stupid to consult someone who is an atheist about life matters, etc.

[Freddie Stubbs]

77. Those who hate religion would have a problem with that

[DURHAM D]

37. One word - pandering. n/t

[SaveElmer]

39. Oh come on...

Many women of faith struggle with the decision over whether to have an abortion or not...many consult with their clergy...

That was all he meant...

[ripple]

45. Thanks, SaveElmer

Hillary performed well tonight, BTW. :hi:

[wyldwolf]

56. the reactionary bombs thrown at religious institutions around here is ponderous.

[donsu]

62. religious institutions need ponderous reactionary bombs

thrown at them for perpetrating myths

[Critters2]

68. And hurt us politically.

In a country where 80% believe in God, the constant attacks on religion don't help in the voting booth. After my time on DU, when people tell me Dems are hostile to religion, I no longer correct them. Sadly.

[More Than A Feeling]

87. Are you ashamed to have humanists, atheists, and other non-believers

in the Democratic Party? Maybe if we shut up, you could pretend we didn't exist, so those "respectable" religious folks wouldn't look down on you for being associated with us, right?

Do you realize that, by your reaction, you validate the hostility to non-believers in this country? Is that something you feel proud of?

[Critters2]

90. I'm not hostile to non-believers. I'm hostile to hostility

The unkind remarks about people who believe in "Magical Sky Wizards" are unnecessary, and unwise politically. I have no problem with atheists, humanists, et al being in the party. I don't even want them to be silent. I do want them to be kind.

When I was active in the Socialist Party, many of those in leadership were progressives BECAUSE of their religious faith (including me). That was accepted and understood. One year, our VP candidate was a nun, and everyone understood the connection between her faith and her politics--even the atheists and humanists, of which there were many. Attacks on believers would not have been tolerated. Nor would attacks on non-believers.

I'd just like to see that same kind of tolerance in this party. AS I said, when people say the Dems are hostile to religion, I no longer correct them. Are you saying I should?

[More Than A Feeling]

93. No, because I know the difference between opposition to supernatural ideas

and hostility towards the people who believe them. Unfortunately, because identity plays such a strong part in religion, believers sometimes think they are being criticized when it is actually the ideas that are being criticized. In this case the criticism is of the idea that training in pneumatology (study of spirits) and christology (study of the nature of Jesus) gives anyone authority to say anything about the decision to have an abortion or not.

Notably, nobody in this thread has stood up for the idea that they do. They instead talk about a woman choosing who her counselors are, which I agree with. But everyone here is acting like a clergyperson is the same thing as a therapist or a best friend, and they aren't. They have an institutional role in promoting supernaturalism, and many of them promote in such a way that is anti-choice. Supernaturalism is not the way to go when it comes to making decisions with real world consequences. That is what I am saying.

I can challenge the basis of the authority of clergy without attacking people. Can you tell the difference?

[Critters2]

98. Is it not an attack on those who look to clergy as authorities?

And not all clergy are anti-choice.

[More Than A Feeling]

105. It's a challenge to unearned authority.

the people who are clergy who can earn it on their own, without the supernatural, should. Those who cannot should not have any authority at all.

I see no more reason for believing that gods are pro-choice than anti-choice. Are you saying that if pro-choice clergy suddenly stopped believing in gods, they'd become anti-choice?

[Critters2]

111. You know full well what I'm saying

and I know what you're saying. So, no point in our continuing to say it. Bye.

[terisan]

69. Organized religion is not God, cannot speak for God, can only tell us what

it or its members believe God is saying.

Unfortunately they often believe God is saying : kill, maim, oppress. Sometimes they believe God is saying be kind, merciful, loving.
It is a force for good sometimes and at other times a force for evil.


That commandment about "not taking the Lord's name in vain" means more, I think, than most people know.

[ultraist]

81. 99% of clergy are men

How insulting to women to imply we need male religious folks to help us with our decisions over our bodies. No thanks.

[Critters2]

108. In my faith tradition, it's 60/40%. That'll change with upcoming retirements. nt

[ripple]

44. He's saying whomever the woman feels comfortable with

It doesn't need to be clergy, or anyone for that matter. But clergy is ok, too. After all, it's all about choice.

[terisan]

71. But did he say that or are you saying what you believe he meant ? nt

[ripple]

76. It's obvious what he meant

except, perhaps, to those who can't or won't acknowledge the fact that the majority of Americans practice some form of religion. And I say that as an agnostic.

[yellowcanine]

92. Apparently not judging by the difference of opinion here. What was the exact quote?

I would rather see us encouraging women to consult their doctors and their ministers than their congressman.

[terisan]

101. I acknowledge that a majority identify with some form of organized religion but disagree that his

meaning was obvious.I also don't know how many women , in making a decision about abortion, consider it to be a decision to be made between oneself and one's clergy.

I am interested that so many seem to want to "interpret" what heObama said for him,

I am reminded of watching a voter on a television program in Election 2000. she said she was voting Republican because she was concerned about the environment. Don't want to be in her position.

[terisan]

72. But did he say that or are you saying what you believe he meant ? nt

[terisan]

73. But did he say that or are you saying what you believe he meant ? nt

[Mass]

53. For some people it does, for some it does not.

It a personal choice to know who you may want to ask advice to.

Contrarely to what you seem to think, having an abortion is a difficult decision for most women, which is often dictated by circumstances. So, they can turn to whoever it is they want to turn to decide what they will end up doing.

I do not remember Obama's wording, but I do not see what the problem here is as long as he did not say they HAD to do it.

[katmondoo]

54. My question too

Talk to my clergyman!! I think NOT

[Critters2]

70. Well, some do. Trust me, people have come to me for support at such moments. nt

[JerseygirlCT]

57. I'm guessing he *meant* any counselors she'd want to involve

but I admit that it sounds just weird when put that way.

[loyalsister]

75. Maybe he's read some history

Unlike some here.

The fact is that If not for clergy, Roe Vs. Wade would never have happened.
Clergy were doing what they could to help women get safe abortions underground before that ruling and hating every minute. It bothered them because they were personally opposed to it.
Many had been advising women to go with their conscience and trying to stay out of it and then discovering they were dead. Eventually, some of them couldn't stand it anymore and began to help direct women to "safe" abotionists.
The Texas Methodist Church filed an Amicus Brief in support of Roe.

Read "A Question of Choice" by Sarah Weddington.

He may understand that women go to whoever they trust for consultation. "Clergy" in a general sense are likely candidates, both historically and culturally. It makes perfect sense to me.
Whether we aetheists like it or not everyone else is not like us. People consult their clergy, whoever they may be, when they are making heart wrenching decisions.

[ripple]

82. Thank you for that reminder n/t

[ultraist]

83. Women do not need men wearing white collars to help them w/THEIR choice

We are perfectly capable of making our own decisions over OUR bodies.

[ripple]

86. But if a woman CHOOSES to consult her clergy

that is certainly her prerogative.

[guidod]

85. I'm an athiest and

it didn't bother me at all. Why should it bother you?

[More Than A Feeling]

88. Because you don't control how I feel and what I think about things?

It's atheist, by the way.

[guidod]

113. Sorry, either you took

what I said in the wrong way or I explained it wrong. Also excuse my typo's. :-)

[yellowcanine]

94. What is the exact quote and the question he was responding to. Lots of noise here, I can't make a

judgement for myself what it is I am supposed to be up in arms about - or not.

[Eurobabe]

96. Yeah, I didn't like that answer AT ALL

Still supporting patriarchy I see. :eyes:

[zulchzulu]

97. Remember...ALL Democrats are not religious or spiritual... thanks for playing...

We must all march in lock step that religion is bad. Bad, bad, bad...

How dare anyone mention religion in people's lives! The shock! The horror!


:sarcasm:

[More Than A Feeling]

99. Heh, judging by the reaction here,

challenging the suggestion that clergy have any basis for authority causes the shock and horror. How dare I suggest that rigorous study of other peoples' opinions about the supernatural doesn't qualify anyone to dispense advice on something as important and personal as the decision on abortion?

[Critters2]

110. Exactly. nt

[zulchzulu]

102. I have an uncle who is a Catholic priest who is pro-choice

He was a Green Beret chaplin in Viet Nam and is a firm Wes Clark supporter. He is certainly pro-choice, pro-gay rights, anti-war and fights hard in the streets for progressive Christian representation for many years.

For people to assume that all clergy are somehow Bushbot zealots is foolish.

[More Than A Feeling]

107. He'd be all those great things without supernatural ideas.

Or is belief in supernatural creator entities the only thing keeping him from becoming an anti-women, anti-gay warmonger?

[zulchzulu]

122. He has seen enough hell on Earth to know how to detect the demons

If you ask my uncle about Bush, you better expect to be sat down and told the myriad, countless ways that Bush and his minions are the farthest thing from the teachings of Jesus than nearly anyone else who has ever been on this Earth. Ever.

[More Than A Feeling]

130. Doesn't matter if they were the teachings of Jesus or the teachings of Fred

Good ethics do not rely on the authority of the one propounding them to be of value. The test of ethics is how well they enable human interaction and relationships, and that needs no supernaturalism.

[Dervill Crow]

112. Why shouldn't they?

Clergy have whatever authority their parishioners choose to give them. If a woman desires help from her clergyperson, so mote it be, so to speak. The decision ultimately is the woman's with input from whomever she chooses.

[More Than A Feeling]

114. That isn't the controversial part, as you can see from this thread.

A woman's right to choose whomever she wants to counsel her is admitted by all. The controversial part, the part no one will defend, is why supernaturalism qualifies anyone to give advice on abortion. All anyone can say is, "well, I know clergy who are pro-choice" or something similar, and my response is "would they be anti-choice if they suddenly stopped believing in supernatural creator entities?"

[Dervill Crow]

118. It surprises me no one will defend that.

The whole concept of supernaturalism is that God or Goddess or The Force or The Big Whatchamacallit is of import in the way we conduct our lives. The part of this that is played by clergy is that of someone who has studied and might be expected to have extra insight as to what course of action might be in keeping with the tenets of the God or Goddess or The Force or The Big Whatchamacallit.

I don't understand what you mean by, "would they be anti-choice if they suddenly stopped believing in supernatural creator entities?" I used to be Lutheran and belonged to two different Lutheran churches at different times. One of my pastors was strongly anti-choice and one was strongly pro-choice. They were both very convicted believers in creationism.

[CRH]

115. 114 replies, much spitting and snarking, and no one knows the original quote?

For a single statement removed from a broader conversation, context is everything. Only on DU.

[lwcon]

117. It's here

http://www.bushvchoice.com/archives/2007/04/abortion_is_par.html


___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[CRH]

119. Thank You for the link ...

for me personally there isn't enough in that quote to really make much of a conclusion or statement. Must be a hot button issue for others.

[rodeodance]

139. "I trust women to make these decisions with their doctor, their family, and their clergy.

i do not agree with his broad sweep that 'the public agrees...."
No problem with rest of comment.






........Edwards is asked about abortion, 32 minutes in, he says the next President will decide who makes choices for women and their bodies. "I believe in a woman's right to choose, but this is an extraordinarily difficult issue for most Americans."

Obama's view on the Supreme Court decision, and the idea that "the public agrees with the Supreme Court's decision." He says, "I trust women to make these decisions with their doctor, their family, and their clergy. I think most Americans agree." He adds that we should move to areas where we agree, like prevention.

[lwcon]

116. I've been outspoken about Obama's religious pandering...

... but this quote didn't particularly freak me out.

I'd rather live in a world where people didn't believe in fictitious origin stories -- or in the priests who propagate them -- but I don't.

Many people will be moved to consult with clergy about complex issues like abortion, so I can't really knock Obama for acknowledging that.

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[Comicstripper]

121. ...because some people rely on clergy for moral decisions. Idiot. He didn't say it was a necessity.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

131. Because sometimes it's your pastor who gets you pregnant.

[donsu]

134. agreed - religious leaders sexually abusing is world rampant

every religion in every country has this problem.

[RamboLiberal]

132. And why the hell do you think they don't

I get tired of the religion bashing around here just as I'm sick of the fundies on the right wing side.

Some women will seek counsel from clergy and if they do that is their business.

If you like Obama you better get used to the fact he's not going to check his religion at the door during the campaign. That's probably true of most of the viable Dem candidates.

And unfortunately in this climate it will probably be a couple of more election cycles for president before candidates will leave religion out of the campaigns.

[TankLV]

138. he was at best laughable at the debates - just like a broken clock...

a broken clock is correct twice a day...

only the obamabots support him now - look out for their wrath!