Obama: Baby-Killer in Disguise

After President Obama's speech at the University of Notre Dame, I was shocked at the amount of attention the event received. Obama stated he would not delve too deep into the issue of abortion; up until now, he's avoided strong confrontation on the subject. But amidst anti-abortion protesters at the 2009 University of Notre Dame commencement ceremony and the gruesome signs they held displaying pictures of aborted fetuses, Obama decided to ad lib, hoping to bring together two extremely polarized groups.

"Maybe we won't agree on abortion," the President addressed the crowd of graduates, faculty, and family members, “but we can still agree that this heart-wrenching decision for any woman is not made casually."

"So let us work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions. Let’s reduce unintended pregnancies. Let’s make adoption more available. Let’s provide care and support for women who do carry their children to term.”

While the church does take a clear stance against abortion, the university said President Obama is in line with many of the Catholic church's principles. The President is working hard to open dialogue with foreign nations, he's working on a timeline to bring troops home, and is also working to end nuclear proliferation. The university stated that despite his stance on abortion, he's also working to end unwanted pregnancies, which should be the larger goal no matter which side of the debate you're on.

The Roman Catholic university faced heat for the decision to give President Obama an honorary degree, a president whose pro-choice and pro-stem cell stance goes against Catholic teachings. Protesters began heckling the President when brought on stage, shouting things like "baby killer" and "abortion is murder." The crowd then responded by shouting the President's campaign slogan "Yes, we can," and the university's chant "We are N.D."

Though the university received criticism from many pro-life enthusiasts and religious pundits about the President's honorary degree, a CNN poll showed that 60 percent of Catholic voters believe the degree should not be rescinded. Over voters as a whole, 56 percent were against the school rescinding the President's invitation.

As a (somewhat) devout Catholic, I have to admit that the opposition facing President Obama over the abortion issue is absurd. Many of the Catholic teachings are out-of-date and out-of-sync with the technological advancements that have taken place in the last century. Enacting pro-life legislation that's in line with the Catholic church puts the lives of women and their unborn fetuses at risk, potentially raising the number of dangerous back-alley abortions. Although Obama is pro-choice, he believes abortion should be the last option for a woman. He also understands that there are exceptional cases that may call for abortion.

In any case, as Amy Poehler stated on Saturday Night Live's Weekend Update, "honorary degrees carry all the gravitas of a number one dad coffee mug." So what's the big deal? There should be greater dissent at the fact that Arizona State University didn't award President Obama with an honorary degree because he has "not done enough." Really?!?! I mean, come on!



At Notre Dame, Obama Calls for Civil Tone in Abortion Debate
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/us/politics/18obama.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&sq=At%20Notre%20Dame,%20Obama%20Calls%20for%20Civil%20Tone%20in%20Abortion%20Debate&st=cse&scp=1

Obama Faces Notre Dame Speech Backlash
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/15/obama.notre.dame/

Polls show majority back Notre Dame's Obama invite
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/14/poll-shows-majority-back-notre-dames-obama-invite/

SNL's Really!?! with Seth and Amy
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/snls-really-no-honorary-degree-president-obama

Media Fail: Scare Tactics and Swine Flu

As much as I'd love to write a serious blog about politics, the Mayday marches and immigrant rights, or the military's torture tactics (sorry!), I have to take this week off to rant about media sensationalism and the current near-pandemic affecting us all. That's right, together now, say it with me: swine flu!

I first heard of this contagious, dangerous, terrifying outbreak from my mother. (Apparently she's a much better at this than I am...) She cautioned me of how quickly the disease was spreading and told me not to go out unless absolutely necessary. I laughed it off, but was soon swarmed by USC emails, news headlines, and video clips telling me just what my mother had told me hours earlier: Run for the hills! Swine flu is near!

Not to make light of the situation, it is a serious matter that has (allegedly, since nothing is proven yet) killed over 80 people and affected over 1,000, a relatively small number considering the 6 billion people that currently inhabit the world. It's not a pandemic, but fear of it's spread has caused the word 'pandemic' to spread like wild fire. What should be a pandemic? Maybe HIV/AIDS, currently afflicting 33 million people? Or maybe the regular flu, which kills thousands per year but receives less media coverage? Or maybe even diabetes, which kills one in every ten people in the UK, a number that may rise to one in every eight by the year 2010?

If there is one thing the media is good at, it's scaring people. Today on the CNN homepage, there were a total of seven headlines pertaining to the deadly "swine flu" virus, days after the number of infected people has begun to dwindle. Many of my friends began to feel light-headed and reported flu-like symptoms after seeings news reports depicting people all over the world wearing face masks. Common use of the words "epidemic," "pandemic," and "fear" are indeed scaring people more than necessary, and while it is the media's duty to report and warn the public of potential harm, it is also their job to not over-sensationalize serious and otherwise un-sensational news.

One of the headlines on CNN.com was a story about men and women who survived the flu pandemic of 1918. Roy Braswell, currently 100 years old, responded saying "I know it's bad, 'cause I had it."

Was interviewing someone who has been alive 100 years and who I'm sure has bigger concerns than the short-lived swine flu pandemic really necessary? Most people haven't in fact had it, but the media has made sure that even we, the ignorant majority, know how bad it is.

This also started a global cultural battle as people in Israel began calling the swine flu "Mexico flu," since their religion prohibits the consumption of pork and pork products. Called the swine flu because of similarities to a previous flu outbreak caused by pigs, this outbreak has not been found in any pigs in Mexico or anywhere else. However, finger pointing continues to plague countries everywhere, and conspiracies of bio-terrorism have even begun to be the subject of many news articles.

While I understand the possible severity of this outbreak, I continue to believe the media is on a desperate mission for ratings. There are more pressing illnesses than the swine flu, illnesses that deserve more media attention and publicity. The swine flu indeed affected less than 10% of those in contact with already infected patients, including family and friends. It's spread was hyped. It is not a pandemic. It is not a bio-weapon. If you are reading this, chances are you are not infected with the swine flu. But because I feel the urge to end this blog dramatically, I will quote Margaret Duchez, a 94-year-old survivor of the 1918 flu pandemic in her interview with CNN.

"My life is in the hands of God. Why should I be afraid?"



1918 flu survivors share memories as research continues
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/05/04/flu.antibodies/index.html

World Health Organization
http://www.who.int/csr/disease/swineflu/en/index.html

Swine flu and the dramatization of disease
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/6615/

Diabetes UK
http://www.diabetes.org.uk/