As you may have heard by now, Senator Barack "Infanticide" Obama has won the endorsement of "NARAL Pro-Choice America," the organization that used to be called, simply "NARAL," which, of course, stood for National Association of Rancid Abortion Lovers. Okay, okay, not really, but it's what they should have been called.
Given the fact that the killing of unborn humans wasn't enough for Obama, who has made clear his support for the killing of born humans who somehow manage to survive their mothers' attempts to have them killed in utero, one would think that this unholy match was made in Hell. And one would be right, too--there has never been a candidate so vehement in his support for the slaughter of innocent unborn Americans as Barack Obama, who has done more to further the hellish cause of Moloch than he wants the average American to know.
But apparently, no one told Hillary Clinton that her position as Abortion Supporter In Chief was in jeopardy. Her supporters are outraged that NARAL would decide Obama's hands were less likely to be washed clean by all the perfumes of Arabia than hers are. In particular, the women behind the infernal Emily's List are not pleased. What, after all of Hillary Clinton's leadership aimed at making sure that the yearly quota of dead unborn humans doesn't ever drop to an unacceptable level? What of her tireless efforts on behalf of feticide? What of her unwavering support for, and commitment to, the mentality of her kind of sex-without-consequences feminism, whose unofficial motto may as well be "The only good baby is a dead baby!"?
It's pretty amazing to stand back and contemplate that in American in the year of Our Lord two thousand and eight, the two people grappling for the nomination to run as the candidate of the Democratic Party for the office of President of the United States are locked in bitter argument about which of them is more in favor of the unrestricted, brutal, and bloody deaths of unborn Americans.
It's hard to imagine the total death of soul and conscience that had to take place before either one of them could have reached this point. Both of them claim to be followers of Christ, yet no one who makes that claim can fail to see the death of the innocent as anything other than a terrible and sinful evil. I could understand how, without the clear guidance of the Catholic Church, a Christian might sincerely believe that abortion in case of threat to the mother's life might be permissible; they'd be wrong, but at least it would be possible to see that they were honestly trying to work through the issue and come to understand it. But for Obama and Mrs. Clinton, no such process is visible: both are totally committed to unrestricted abortions of convenience, where any time a woman decides that it's not a good time for her to be pregnant she can pay someone to end the life of the living child inside of her. And the vast majority of abortions take place for reasons of convenience, not in the "hard cases" of rape or incest or where the mother's physical life might be in danger.
Obama has called abortion a "profound moral challenge," while Hillary Clinton has said, "I believe we can all recognize that abortion in many ways represents a sad, even tragic choice to many, many women." In a way, that makes each of their respective positions all the more monstrous. A person who believes that abortion is not the killing of an unborn human being is wrong, but such a person's support for abortion is at least logical. But for abortion to be sad or tragic or a profound moral challenge means that there's something terribly, terribly wrong with abortion, that it is somehow evil. To recognize that abortion involves an evil act but to continue to support it at every opportunity for political gain is the most soulless and immoral position a politician can take on the issue--and Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are fighting over which of them is the more soulless.
Catholics who would support either one of these dead souls in the general election ought to do a bit of soul-searching themselves. There is no graver evil, no more hideous and festering tumor on the American body politic than the scourge of abortion. No person who supports it with the rabid and fanatical enthusiasm of either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama ought to be trusted to run a nation; I wouldn't trust either of them to run a convenience store. And for those who think that any of the other issues we face today outweigh the evil of abortion or the likelihood that infanticide and ESCR and other spinoffs of the American abortion industry will increase under either of these two vampires, consider this: if a person tells you that something is "tragic" or a "moral challenge" on the one hand, but has been utterly tireless in his/her promotion of that very thing, on what grounds do you give them credit for having the integrity to deal honestly with you on anything else?