Ah yes. Opening my hotmail account, I am told by the MSN website that Catholics can support Obama…with a link to a Newsweek article.

When the bishops and the Vatican warn about the culture of death in America, maybe their voice should be given a bit more publicity than Catholic dissidents.  But of course that won’t do. Who listens to bishops? So the press always quotes a law professor named Kmeic, who may have been a Republican, but is not a Catholic leader at any viable level, at least at the level of ordinary Catholics.

The excuse given by these activists is that Obama will change government policy to help a woman carry the pregnancy to term, thereby lowering the abortion rate; none of these articles seem to realize that Medicaid already covers most women below a certain income, and gives medical care to many indigent children too.

As the Newsweek article notes:

The argument is, some might contend, a bold one. Yet it is also counterintuitive, running up against the fact that, by most measures and despite his rhetoric about reducing the incidence of abortion, Barack Obama has an unalloyed record of support for abortion on demand. Moreover, he seems to understand Roe vs. Wade and subsequent Supreme Court decisions as having defined abortion as a fundamental liberty right essential for women’s equality, meaning that government must guarantee access to abortion in law and by financial assistance—a moral judgment and a policy prescription the pro-life Catholic Obama boosters say they reject.

In other words, Obama is a true believer in Abortion, with all of it’s attendant cultural overtones.

I wonder if those American Catholics who justify their support of Obama ever see the extent of the issue, not only on Catholic institutions in America, but on conservative Catholic and Muslim countries overseas.

Right now, Filipinos are under pressure from outside well funded NGO’s and our elites to have our government clinics give out contraceptives.

Now, contraceptives are available in grocery stores, and from private clinics. And the population growth rate in the Philippines has managed to go way down, mainly due to Natural Family planning, which is used by many couples.

But mandating birth control as a government policy in public clinics will result in many Catholic doctors and nurses quitting, and open the door to coercion of the poor to be sterilized, a nasty practice that has occurred in Peru, India, and alas, among minorities in the US in the past.

The Clinton administration linked foreign aid with legalizing abortion, united with activists at a UN Conference to try to make abortion declared as a “human right”, and promoted NGO’s to insert their “sex education” into schools  as part of the HIV agenda.

Bush has reversed this policy, not, as his critics claim, to placate the “religious right” but because there was a lot of resentment overseas against foreigners pushing agendas that locals viewed as immoral or wrong.

Conservative Asian countries, like those in Africa, prefer to teach self control and purity for the unwed as a way to strengthen marriage, partly due to strong religious beliefs, but also because in much of Asia and Africa only a strong family enables the poor, the sick, and the elderly to survive.

That is why most Asian countries (Muslim, Christian, Buddhist and Hindu) prefer the “high risk” groups be aided by NGO’s: this allows that government to continue to officially disapprove of drug use and promiscuity while letting NGO’s care for those who need help.

What many Asian governments do not want is the “safe sex” and “gender” issues of these NGO’s be promoted as “normal behavior”, especially in their public schools in the name of HIV prevention.  Many Asian cultures are “shame” cultures, where shaming a person stops undesirable behavior, and a lot of the governments don’t especially want to be identified as promoting shameful behavior.

One reason American film and TV shows are often looked down upon is not that Americans are more “sinful” than Filipinos or Indoys or Indians, but that American cultural exports don’t just show sin, but the sin is flaunted, made to look glamourous and desirable,  and no one is made ashamed of their sins.

Without this “cross cultural”perspective, one would not be aware of the problem.

So when Jesse Jackson (who may or may not know Obama’s plans) who has promised those at an international conference that:

“Barack is determined to repair our relations with the world of Islam and Muslims,” Jackson says. “Thanks to his background and ecumenical approach, he knows how Muslims feel while remaining committed to his own faith.”

By this, Jackson means kowtowing to the dictators in the Middle East while deserting the democracies in Iraq and Israel. This will make Obama very popular in the government controlled press in that area.

But Jackson doesn’t even mention the probability that Obama will return to Clinton’s policies in promoting what the Vatican calls the “culture of death”, slowly destroying the moral values of Islam and Christianity and Hinduism and Buddhism in the name of freedom, while not recognizing that the revulsion of the average man and woman encourages reversion to fundamentalism as a way to protest against the decadent culture.

———————

Nancy Reyes is a retired physician living in the rural Philippines. She writes about human rights at MakaipaBlog

Be Sociable, Share!