Obama endorsed by NARAL Pro-Choice America (Update)

Obama picked up another key endorsement today, that of NARAL Pro-Choice America. This move indicates NARAL has now assumed Obama will be the nominee over Clinton. Not all that surprising since the pro-choice and pro-life groups will split on party lines.

A report on the endorsement from USAToday:

NEW YORK (AP) — Democrat Barack Obama has won the endorsement of NARAL Pro-Choice America, a leading abortion rights advocacy organization that has supported rival Hillary Rodham Clinton throughout her political career.

The organization was set to announce the endorsement of its political action committee on Wednesday.

“Pro-choice Americans have been fortunate to have two strong pro-choice candidates in Senator Obama and Senator Clinton, both of whom have inspired millions of new voters to participate in this historic presidential race,” NARAL president Nancy Keenan said in a statement. “Today, we are proud to put our organization’s grass-roots and political support behind the pro-choice candidate whom we believe will secure the Democratic nomination and advance to the general election. That candidate is Senator Obama.”

Officials said NARAL’s political committee board was about evenly divided among Clinton and Obama supporters and that the decision to endorse was hard fought. Ultimately, the board voted unanimously to support the Illinois senator.

NARAL officials said the decision was not intended to snub Clinton, who is running to be the first female U.S. president.

Update

Video put out by NARAL:

What’s interesting her is that NARAL did indeed choose Obama over Clinton, the woman in the race. One might think that a group pushing “abortion rights” or rights of a woman over her body might be inclined to endorse Hillary regardless of the current state of the race. Although, clearly they were holding out for a nominee.

  • Stalin

    Obama should be so proud. He has been endorsed by a lobby group who’s goal is to kill more babies. This puts the Hamas endorsement to shame.

  • Babs

    How big of an issue do you abortion rights will become in the general election, Stalin? It occured to me this morning as I was looking over Obama’s new “faith flyer” that the rejection of this strategy may not be so much from the regilous sect as from the pro-life sect. Just wondered what your thoughts are……..

  • Stalin

    I don’t think it will be any different than the past few years. However, it should be an issue for blacks because Planned Parenthoood has targeted their neighborhoods. If targeted genocide isn’t the racism than I don’t know what is.

    I think the faith flyer is definitely targeted toward the religious groups. I don’t think many pro-life voters will vote for Obama regardless of what he says about his faith.

  • Babs

    Well, the abortion issue being a major moral issue, especially in the south, I thought it might be a mantal the pro-lifers would take up.

    I don’t know that it won’t be a larger issue. Refresh my memory, were the candidates in the past few years so very different in their views as is McCain and Obama? I believe I remember seeing that Obama voted for partial birth abortions, didn’t he? And McCain is commited to the pro-lifers. Way left and right on that one. I was thinking most democrats waded somewhere in the safe middle of the pond. Maybe I’m wrong on that one.

  • Josh

    Woah, Stalin, when did you become Rod Parsley? Abortion isn’t an issue for most Democrats. I personally don’t give it a thought. I don’t personally like the idea of abortion, but I certainly don’t think it’s my right to seek to dictate the choices that others make regarding this issue. That’s their private business, which is what Roe v. Wade is based on, privacy. Roe v. Wade makes no commentary on the morality of abortion, because the government is not allowed to dictate morality. Republicans should realize, at some point, that the government is not going to change the legality of abortion. If you want to pass judgment on someone for having an abortion, that’s your right. However, it is the person having the abortion’s right to not have the government interfere with their private choices. Why the discussion about this anyway, NARAL always endorses the Democratic candidate, whoever they are, so did you really expect anything different?

  • Babs

    We were discussing this, Josh, because an endorsement was made, and the article was posted. Since I’ve never taken a stand on the issue, I hope you’re not insinuating that I’m passing judgement on the issue.

    However, to say that “Republicans should realize, at some point, that the government is not going to change the legality of abortion” shows how young you are. You see, the government DID change the legality of abortion, that’s WHY ITS LEGAL.

    Thank you for informing us that NARAL always endorses the Democratic candidate. Their own website failed to mention that. Not sure how revelant it was to the discussion, but thanks anyway. 😉

  • Stalin

    Josh,

    Settle down. I am not getting into an abortion debate on this site because it will be futile. There is just a fundammental diffence of opinion on this issue and it will never be resolved in my lifetime. However, I have every damn right in the world to express my opinion and say that I believe it is wrong.

  • Just for argument’s sake, the government legislates morality everyday with every law. Is murder and child abuse immoral? Of course they are, why else would the government have passed laws against them? In fact, without making moral judgments, how do you outlaw any behavior?

    My point is that most law is originally rooted in some form of morality so I don’t really agree with the notion that the government doesn’t legislate morality, they do it all the time.

  • Stalin

    The government even legislates morality on what we can eat. Chicago finally overturned the ban on foi gras. This actually happened in what used to be the meat packing capital of the world.

  • Whobody

    Nice side note, Stalin.

  • Michel

    Stalin is right… abortion is indeed killing.

    That’s why we should ban also the death penalty and the war.

    Provoking death actually is good to let others live better, to maintan balance. With death penalty it’s harder to draw a line dividing who should die and who shouldn’t. With war, it’s the same thing.

    Luckily, with the abortion issue that line is already there. It’s called birth.

    I think we can have a civilized discussion on the matter as long as no one starts insulting people calling them “baby murderers” or something like that.

  • Stalin

    Michel,

    We actually agree on something. I am truly shocked and impressed at the same time.

  • Michel

    I am too. And glad at the same time. Actually I don’t know how much we agree on this, but I’m willing to let it be that way.

    😉 Take care.

  • Josh

    The government does legislate morality, but so far as everyone agrees on this definition of morality. If the vast majority of Americans defined abortion as morally wrong, as most believe rape and abuse is wrong, then legislation would follow as such. As it stands right now, it is unclear that most Americans define abortion as morally wrong, thus we cannot seek to define their morality.

    Babs, the government didn’t change the legality of abortion, the Supreme Court decided that laws banning it were unconstitutional. This may not seem like a big difference to you, but it’s a huge difference. I said that NARAL always endorses the Democratic candidate because I don’t see the purpose of the argument about this endorsement. It’d be like Democrats getting up in arms about NRL endorsing McCain, it’s to be expected.

  • Stalin

    Josh,

    I’ve done some research on the NRL, and yes, the Naval Research Laboratory would probably endorse McCain since he was a naval airman.

  • Josh

    National right to life campaign, NRLC or whatever their letters are…is that all you’ve got to argue on? I ask because your arguments have been weak lately Stalin…

  • IndiMinded

    Aw come on Josh, you have to be able to take a light jab now and then.

    For my money the issue of abortion isn’t about legislating morality, or even about whether an unborn child has the right to life. It’s about whether an unborn child has the right to occupy his mother’s body, sap her resources, and risk her health for those first 9 months of existence, whether or not she is a willing participant in this relationship.

    Obviously I’m grateful to have been born, as is everyone who’s reading this I imagine. But I’m also glad my mother had some choice in the matter – my own feeling is that for a woman to give her very body over to usher another being into the world – this is a miracle, but this is a gift that must be voluntary given. It should not be forced on anyone who is unwilling, certainly not by law.

    When a pregnancy is terminated, it is the loss of a potential life, and a tragedy. But if pregnancy is forced, that is loss of freedom, and makes slavery of a miracle. Appeals for the life of an unborn child should be made to the woman asked to bear it, not to the police man asked to force her to bear it.

    That’s just my 2 cents. Obama was endorsed by Roe v Wade not because he wants to kill babies, but because he doesn’t want to take away a woman’s control over her own body. McCain does.

  • IndiMinded

    bah, he wasn’t endorsed by roe v wade, though he does endorse it. Obviously I meant NARAL 😉

  • Stalin

    Josh,

    I wasn’t making an argument, I was making light of your mistake and having a little fun with you. Lighten up, you’re in college for crying out loud.

  • Babs

    You’re right Josh, it doesn’t look ANY difference to me. First it was illegal, now it’s legal. It was illegal, then the government made it legal. Hmm, anyway you slice it, the government legalized it.

  • Josh

    See Babs, I knew you wouldn’t get it….

    Stalin, sorry to get so worked up, but I get annoyed by the abortion issue because it’s not something that a presidential race should be about. I know many Republicans who are so only because of abortion and gay rights….it’s so sad!

  • Stalin

    Josh,

    You have to remember that only presidents can appoint supreme court judges and the issues you mentioned are ultimately decided by those judges.

  • They don’t have a viable pltofarm. The party of less government and fiscal conservatism has just come off a drunken spending spree that has come closer to bankrupting the world than all of the wars to date combined.Abortion: Talk pro-life but don’t actually DO anything.Spending: Borrow Spend! Run up that credit card! We won’t be around when the bills come in!Base: Get the Jesus Freaks involved! They’ll vote for us if he holler pro-life loudly enough.