Faith Forum at Saddleback Church

For those that missed it - this past Saturday, there was a kind of 'Faith Debate/Forum' hosted by Saddleback Chuch. The pastor is Rick Warren, author of 'A Purpose Driven Life.

It had an interesting format. Warren was set to have one hour with both Barak Hussein Obama (aka BHO) and John McCain. He asked the same questions of each. BHO first (by coin toss) followed by McCain. Neither knew the questions to be asked, and McCain could not hear the responses of BHO.

I have selected questions - one related to faith - one not, to highlight what I believe are key, critical distinctions between the two. It is left to you, gentle reader, to view the entire transcript if you are so inclined (http://www.rickwarrennews.com/transcript/).

Question one ' AT WHAT POINT DOES A BABY GET HUMAN RIGHTS IN YOUR VIEW?'

My comment - He is asking an 'in your view question'. This is designed to elicit an OPINION- not a fiat, not an absolute answer - and opinion. And this question of human rights is, I believe, central to the abortion debate. Our policy makers have avoided it - but it is central.

This was BHO's response: Well, I think that whether you are looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientfic perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my paygrade.

This was McCain's response: At the moment of conception.

My commentary: First, he is asking an 'in your view question'. This is designed to elicit an OPINION- not a fiat, not an absolute answer - and opinion. And this question of human rights is, I believe, central to the abortion debate. Our policy makers have avoided it - but it is central.


My comments

First to BHO.

Really? BHO, you do not have an opinion as to when a fetus deserves Human Rights? You were not asked a scientic question like - 'when is a fetus viable'. Nor a theological one 'when does life begin'. Simply a legal one (you ARE a lawyer, right?) - when should the unborn have Human Rights. So, you avoided the whole question. We know nothing more about your thinking before than after - other than you are kind of slick is avoiding an issue about which you know people disagree!!!

As for McCain

You can agree with him or not - but you KNOW where he stands. I find this positively refreshing.

Score - McCain 1, BHO - 0.

Next question: WHAT'S THE MOST GUT WRENCHING DECISION YOU'VE EVER HAD TO MAKE AND WHAT WAS THE PROCESS THAT YOU USED TO MAKE IT?

BHO's Response: Well, you know, I think the opposition to the war in Iraq was a tough decision that I've had to make not only becasue there were political consequences but also becasue Saddam Hussien was a bad person and there was no doubt that he met America ill .....


McCain's Response: It was long ago and far away in a prison camp in North Vietnam, My father was a high ranking Admiral. The Vietnamese came and said that I could leave prison early. And we had a code of conduct that said you only leave by order of capture. I also had a dear and beloved friend who was from California by the name of Ed Alvarez who had been shot down and captured a couple years before me ..... So, I said no.

My comments.

First about BHO

The big trouble with his 'wrenching' experience - he was in the Illinois State Senate at the time the decision about going to Iraq was made. He was not even a position to vote on the resolution (McCain, on the other hand, was). There were no 'political consequences' for him. He was on the outside looking in. He was TOTALLY irrelevant, mearly a member of the chattering class.

Next about McCain.

You really need to read his description of the torture they received to fully appreciate what the decision to stay behind meant. It is inhuman how he was treated. But, despite that, 1) He followed a code of conduct 2) He had hopes that his friend would be released before he was.

Now, I ask you - who has the most compelling definition of 'gut wrenching'? 1) A guy who voiced a meaningless opinion about an issue he could have no impact on, or 2) A guy who willingly chose to accept more torture of unknown duration (It would up being 3 MORE years) so he could be true to his code of conduct and his friend?

If you picked (1) (BHO) - you are hopeless, hapless, and witless.

Score - McCain -2 , BHO - 0

My conclusion - these two questions give you great insight into these two men. One is afraid of voicing and opinion he knows will be disagreed with in some circles. The other just says what he thinks. One lacks any history of life or leadership to really have had to make a true 'gut wrenching' decision. The other had to make such a choice - and showed his honor, character, and selflessness in the process.

And how do BHO supporters react? Well, to their credit - they are admitting McCain did better. But, they explained it by suggesting (with ZERO evidence) that McCain MUST have cheated. Because, in the words of Andrea Mitchell - he seemed so well prepared. Could it be that McCain was just speaking from the heart? That would eliminate the need to give the answers a lot of thought, lawyer-speak, or Clinton era parsing.....

Game, Set, Match ---- McCain.