Obama, the Controversial Choice
May 14th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
Update (see below)
NARAL Pro-Choice America endorsed Barack Obama for president today. “Sen. Obama has a fully pro-choice record, and we are confident that as president he will be a champion for women’s reproductive rights,” the organization formerly known simply as NARAL wrote on its Web site (you can view a video explaining the endorsement on the site as well).
The endorsement elicited an immediate rebuke from Ellen Malcolm, president of EMILY’s List, which supports women candidates.
“I think it is tremendously disrespectful to Sen. Clinton - who held up the nomination of a FDA commissioner in order to force approval of Plan B and who spoke so eloquently during the Supreme Court nomination about the importance of protecting Roe vs. Wade - to not give her the courtesy to finish the final three weeks of the primary process,” Malcolm said in a statement. “It certainly must be disconcerting for elected leaders who stand up for reproductive rights and expect the choice community will stand with them.”
EMILY’s List has, not surprisingly, endorsed Clinton. The group has given her campaign $323,567; Clinton’s fifth-biggest donor. And Malcolm stumped for Clinton around the state before the Texas primary.
Update:
Some of NARAL’s state affiliates are angry about the Obama endorsement. The Texas affiliate is among those backing away. Here’s the statement form NARAL Pro-Choice Texas: “This decision was made internally by NARAL Pro-Choice America, based in Washington D.C., and without the consultation of the NARAL state affiliates across the country, including NARAL Pro-Choice Texas…..we will not be issuing an endorsement of a Presidential candidate. When a pro-choice nominee for President is named, NARAL Pro-Choice Texas will stand proudly with that pro-choice candidate.”
May 17th, 2008 at 10:04 am
Abortion - Womens right to reproduce though is a personal right cannot be separated from agreement to carry the right with.This agreement to reproduce as it happens is because of the mens right to donate or participate.Here the right to distrbiute becomes right to donate with a sub clause of right to accept. These rights are covered under Due Process Clause which is a procedural clause.
So the decision to terminate as in Doe vs Wade case earlier to the seventh months where afterwards there is a injury clause to the mother.Upon reaching the 7th month the due process results in one of the cul de sac, as there is no recourse to conduct the method of abortion by artifical means. So the process turn out to be accident or unnatural causes or natural causes not related to decision of abortion.
Here the right becomes offence or negligence. Womens willingness to carry later turns to be engagement in sex, or natural reasons which is a abuse of right.
Right to reproduce is different from right to have free sex as reproduction is combined with right of survivial.
In all situations abortion is a personal right but cannot be a binding right.Discourage of abortion as a right of privacy is a must.
In future these rights could turn out to be a abuse. The choice to reproduce must be limited to right to donate and right to carry.