Obama supporters claiming to be "pro-life" were never, really, opposed to abortion...

(Tim, from LifeSiteNews.com) Prior to the election, I found those who called themselves "pro-life" while shilling for Senator Barack Obama to be morally repugnant. Now, these hypocrites have had more than enough opportunities publicly to acknowledge their mistake; they've had weeks to cry "foul" or "I was misled by Senator Obama's lies concerning abortion;" yet they are silent.

Where are their protests? Where are they denouncing the aggressive promotion of abortion, internationally, that President Obama has given himself to since taking office at the White House? Where have the voices of Brian McLaren and Tony Campolo been raised in protest of President Obama's advocacy of child-slaughter? And turning to McLaren's and Campolo's useful simpletons, do any of them feel just the least bit betrayed and ashamed of their naivete?

It would be hard to prove, but I'm convinced that many of those who supported Senator Obama's presidential aspirations while claiming, themselves, to be Christian and pro-life were not pro-life at all, but rather, themselves often had had one or more abortions (or helped others to get one) and voted for Senator Obama as a coping mechanism employed to silence their conscience. And I do not say this from any anger at President Obama being elected to our nations highest elected office. Rather, it's my own personal observation.

Well, again, when guilt and complicity have silenced Emerjellicals, Rome speaks.

Here's Roman Catholic leadership that I, a Protestant Presbyterian pastor, agree with entirely..

A leading Catholic archbishop is calling a fraud President Barack Obama's claims that he will lead efforts to reduce abortions. During a trip to Ireland, Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver said merely wanting to reduce abortions as opposed to ending the practice entirely is not pro-life.

Chaput said Obama's recent move to send taxpayer dollars to other nations for pro-abortion groups to spend to promote and perform abortions violated his abortion reduction promise.

“His reason for signing the executive order was that it was time to put this ‘divisive issue behind us,’ once and for all,” Chaput said.

“There's something a little odd about rhetoric that tells that we're the ‘divisive’ ones, and lectures adult citizens about what we should challenge, and when we should stop. In a democracy, we get to decide that for ourselves," he said.

“An issue that involves the life and death of unborn children and the subversion of entire traditional societies can't be ‘put behind us’ with an executive signature," Chaput added.

He talked about groups like Catholic for the Common Good, Third Way, and others that provided cover for Obama's pro-abortion positions during the election.

“During the last U.S. election, we saw the emergence of so-called pro-life organizations that argued we should stop fighting the legal struggle over abortion. Instead we should join with ‘pro-choice’ supporters to seek ‘common ground,'" he explained.

“Their argument was simple: Why fight a losing battle on the legal, cultural and moral front since - according to them -- we haven't yet made serious progress in ending legalized abortion?" he continued. "Let's drop the ‘divisive’ political battle, they said, and instead let's all work together to tackle the economic and health issues that might eventually reduce abortions."

But Chaput said that argument wasn't acceptable for opponents of slavery, wasn't acceptable to opponents of racism and shouldn't be alright with pro-life advocates.

“Did Americans take a gradual, social-improvement road to ‘reducing’ racism? No. We passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” he said.

“Nor have I ever heard anyone suggest that the best way to deal with murder, rape or domestic abuse is to improve the availability of health care and job training. We make rape illegal -- even though we know it will still sometimes tragically occur -- because rape is gravely evil. It's an act of violence, and the law should proscribe it," he said.

“Of course, we also have a duty to improve the social conditions that can breed domestic and sexual violence. But that doesn't change the need for the law," Chaput added. “Likewise, if we really believe that abortion is an intimate act of violence, then we can't aim at anything less than ending abortion."