Obamas Inconvenient Truth

In this new age of responsibility, rich and poor alike can discard their inconvenient products of conception. President Obama, in overturning a Bush executive order, freed tax funds to support international organizations involved with abortion. Bush may have been pandering to the tens of thousands of abortion protesters when he originally signed his executive orders or maybe he sincerely believes that the lives of the least among us should receive protection. Obama may have been pandering to abortion providers when he overturned the executive order in his first month of his presidency or maybe he sincerely believes that “no one should be punished with a baby.” Perhaps tax funds could be more responsibly released to adoptive parents or orphanages if he sincerely believed that we need to reduce our “need” for abortion.

Maybe President Obama was elected because most Americans think that reducing automotive pollution and oil consumption as well as baby carbon footprints is a more morally compelling responsibility. In another first move, Obama waved his magic executive wand and allowed states to require higher automotive standards than the federal government currently requires. Some suggest that the technology to “make it so” does not yet exist and when it does it will add thousands of dollars more to the cost of a new vehicle. That ought to keep some folk in their more polluting beaters a bit longer while the struggling automakers keep struggling. No matter the unintended consequences, the noble intention is that at some point in the distant future, Obama’s order will have saved our mother earth - maybe. Who cares about today’s inconvenient babies who would consume her food, poop in her water and eventually want to take Sunday drives over her body? Could they be allowed to live if somehow they could promise to live in high density housing and use public transportation?