RSS
More Feeds












God's Politics

Obama’s Health-Care Speech: Hope Over Fear

by Jim Wallis 09-10-2009

In his speech last evening, President Barack Obama made the commitments that a broad coalition in the faith community had asked for — reform as a moral issue, affordable coverage for all, and no federal funding of abortion.

First, the faith community has asked the president to make “the moral case” for health-care reform, not just the policy arguments — and he couldn’t have been more clear about the moral imperative for fixing a broken system.  He quoted a letter from Ted Kennedy, written last spring but delivered to the president after Kennedy’s death, stating that health care “is above all a moral issue; that at stake are not just the details of policy, but fundamental principles of social justice and the character of our country.”

Second, we have told the White House that the faith community will accept nothing less than accessible, affordable, and secure coverage for everyone.  The president said that “if you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans who don’t currently have health insurance, the second part of this plan will finally offer you quality, affordable choices.” And while there may be various means of achieving that goal, “I will not back down on the basic principle that if Americans can’t find affordable coverage, we will provide you with a choice.” He rejected the incremental approaches that will again postpone bringing everyone into America’s health-care system and making sure it is working for all of us — and so will we.

Third, we have told the president that we needed to hear a clear commitment on prohibiting federal funding of abortion as well as maintaining a strong conscience protection. He gave that public commitment: “Under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.” As the president said, “there remain some significant details to be ironed out,” but his commitment to these principles means we can now work together to make sure that they are consistently and diligently applied to any final health-care legislation. The practical application of that principle should mean that no person should be forced to pay for someone else’s abortion, and that public funds cannot be used to pay for elective abortions.

Now it is the job of the faith community and every concerned American to make sure the final bill reflects these moral principles.  And the faith community will continue to be vigilant to ensure that each one is followed throughout the process of achieving health-care legislation.  The president has set the stage for finally achieving real solutions to health-care reform by defining the deeper moral issues at stake and clarifying the policy debate.  We will now be calling on our members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, many of them members of our congregations, to support these moral commitments and to make sure, as they “iron out the details,” that each one is firmly upheld.

At the beginning of the speech, after noting the continuing economic crisis, President Obama said, “[W]e did not come here just to clean up crises.  We came to build a future.”  That future indeed involves a significant social transformation, and like most such change, it invokes strong reactions. We in the faith community have a special role in that process of change — to help the nation make the spiritual choice of hope rather than fear, and to believe that the way for all of us to move forward as a society is to make that choice.

To learn more about health-care reform, click here to visit Sojourners’ Health-Care Resources Web page.

Categories: Health
Share or bookmark this post:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Mixx
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
advertisement


Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

  • Lord_Voldemort
    Sorry, but that speech was a huge mistake. It'll just take a little while to unravel, that's all.

    Too many facts got mangled, too much energy was put into defending a program that too many Americans have no faith in. Too little time was spent broadening a coalition.

    Brace yourselves, this could be messy. But the Lord works in mysterious ways. Perhaps he led us to elect this man so that the nation would finally have a chance to vomit out the poison of Alinsky leftism in which Obama himself is deeply marinaded.

    That's my sincere hope. It should be yours too Jim. It's the best chance you have for the return of a humane and genuinely Christian left.

    LV
  • mackharrell
    LV:

    "Too many facts got mangled,"

    which facts?

    "too much energy was put into defending a program that too many Americans have no faith in..."

    Um, would that be the so-called "public option" - of the whole speech, maybe 4 minutes? Too much time? I guess if you listen to O'Reilly et al., "too many Americans have no faith in a public option..." OTOH, other pundits count the noses differently.

    "Too little time was spent broadening a coalition."

    What coalition? Did you see those fat cats sitting there, their jaw muscles twitching? Did you hear one of them lose his cool and call the President a liar? Seek a coalition with such ilk, liars and thieves, vultures, folks who believe it right and proper to profit from the suffering of others? Talk about bedding down with the devil!

    And you want a "humane and genuinely Christian Left?" I dare say Jesus style justice won't be seen as "humane" ... and maybe not even "Christian" upon his return.
  • Ashleigh101
    I had no problem whatsoever with the man who called out "You lie." That is, plain and simple, DEMOCRACY at its finest. Right? We do live in a democracy, you know. Where the government is supposed to serve US, not us serving the govt. Where people are allowed to disagree with elected officials, including the President.

    Come on! If it had been George Bush, there would've been NO media outcry whatsoever. Heck, when Bush had a shoe thrown at him, the media practically cheered... they all analyzed how he brought it on himself. Bush was also booed and heckled by Congress. No media outcry then.

    There is this HUGE double standard, and Democrats don't "allow" the type of treatment they will treat others with. For the past month, they have insulted and dismissed citizens who spoke out at townhalls... calling them nazis, astroturf, even retards. Heck, that Van Jones guy, who just resigned (one of Obama's MANY unvetted czars) called Republicans "a**holes." Where was the outcry then?? Why didn't Obama address "civility" when Dems were insulting townhall citizens or Van Jones' outburst?

    How is it that you, and Mr. Wallis, don't see the hypocrisy of Obama and the "left?" How is it that you just blindly believe every word out of his mouth?? It truly amazes me. As Christians, we are urged by Jesus and the apostles, in the Bible, to be DISCERNING, to be wise, to not be naive and foolish.

    So, here is Obama, making all these promises... and it truly amazes me that you, and Mr. Wallis, and others, really believe everything he says. And you treat him just like the Left does... never questioning his words, never having any concern for his motives... just blindly following this man and almost even exalting him, as you insult those who disagree with or criticize him.

    I personally think you will be in for such a huge, huge disappointment when this health care does pass (heaven forbid) and you find that so much of it isn't at all what Obama promised.

    I also have a VERY hard time understanding how Christians can be so blind and so adoring of Obama and his policies, as well as his view that government should take care of society and intrude as much as he is trying to do. It truly baffles me and I simply do not understand. And actually, it sometimes even makes me sick to my stomach.

    And a note to Jim Wallis: I will NOT be joining you in calling the White House to urge passage of this horrible bill. I will be calling to express my disgust, outrage, and opposition to it. Joining me will be about 52% of the population accoring to polls. I do NOT want government to have this much control in our lives, and it seriously astounds me that you are in such denial of the fact that this health care plan WILL result in MASSIVE government intrustion and control of American citizens. ASTOUNDS me.

    And, IF this bill passes, I will make sure to come back here to say "I told you so" when abortion is indeed covered by this bill, because unless Obama backs down from pressure from the public, it WILL be in the bill.

    Obama is not against abortion. Look at his voting record. Look at the things he said to Planned Parenthood while campaigning. Look at legislations he's already overturned or passed since being in office (e.g. Mexico Policy).

    He is a hypocrite, and his motives are not pure. His motives are mainly control by the government. GM takeover, bank takeover, stimulus package with all its strings, cap and trade, health care. How is it that you cannot see what his motives are??????? I DON'T GET IT!!!! I don't get these people who are so blind or in denial, esp. the ones who call themselves Christians and treat this guy as if he's some sort of perfect man who would never lie or who has only pure motives. I think it's really sad.
  • MarKatJac
    I was pregnant with my first child when I discovered that my insurance company didn't consider pregnancy a 'disease' and would not pay for prenatal care. I PAID CASH FOR ALL MY CARE, INCLUDING LABOR AND DELIVERY. (coincidentally, an abortion would have been significantly cheaper, since $$$$ seems to be what motivates you, I thought I'd mention that.)

    I learned that Medicaid (yes, healthcare provided by the government) paid for prenatal care, and so when I was pregnant with my 2nd child, I made sure that I was within the financial window to get decent care. (and NO, medicaid won't pay for an abortion, even though it certainly would be cheaper for the 'state' now wouldn't it, and hasn't for the 40 year's it's been a government program).

    Since you seem to have hot poker stick for people who read Jesus' words literally, let's try this one on for size...

    Come and get the kingdom God promised you. That kingdom has been prepared for you since the world was made. You can have this kingdom, because I was hungry and you gave me food to eat. I was thirsty, and you gave me something to drink. I was alone and away from home, and you invited me into your home. I was without clothes, and you gave me something to wear. I was sick, and you cared for me. I was in prison, and you came to visit me.' "Then the good people will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and give you food? When did we see you thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you alone and away from home and invite you into our home? When did we see you without clothes and give you something to wear? When did we see you sick or in prison and care for you?' "Then the king will answer, 'I tell you the truth. Anything you did for any of my people here, you also did for me....

    I wonder what it would be like being your neighbor? I can tell already... If I asked you for a bottle of neosporin, you would say "I am not a socialist" I cannot help you, because to help the poor would be socialism, and I fear socialism worse than hell...

    BTW: Cap and trade is the best way to honor the mandate given to us 7000 years ago, to protect the Earth.

    Healing the sick? Hmmmm, I think Jesus did that, and on the Sabath. That sick person should have morgaged his house to pay for that medical care, and left Jesus alone.

    At NO TIME did Jesus or any OTHER religious person from any tradition say BLESSED ARE THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS, for they have my interests at heart...

    We rank 37th in the world in healthcare. 75% of all doctors are satisfied that Medicare provides appropriate care for their patients, and although they wished payment was better, they could live with a similar plan for the other 50million citizens in the USA.

    President Obama is not perfect. No President is, but whatever happened to at least a minimal lip service to....

    1 Peter 2

    13. Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;

    14. Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.

    15. For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:

    16. As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.

    17. Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.
  • WitnessforPeace
    Jim doesn't speak for the faith community. He might have a credible claim to speak for the majority of his subscribers, but that's it. He's making EXACTLY the same mistake he chastises the Religious Right for. And if the President is telling the truth about abortion, why not make it an explicit amendment to the bill? But that's been rejected. Social justice demands truth, and that's in short supply these days. In the 1980's, Sojourners had a cover story "Ronald Reagan is Lying about Central America" Reagan was indeed lying, but now Jim's telling Obama's lies for him! For free! Very sad to see you sink this far, Jim.....
  • Ashleigh101
    What the heck is "faith community" anyways?! Is that like the new cool way of saying "church??" Because we have to be cool nowadays in order to reach people right? (rolling eyes)

    I have noticed though that Jim and just about every blogger here is a total 100% Obama supporter-- on board with every single thing he proposes, never questioning any of his policies, words, actions, and also anti Republicans.

    And I'm trying to reconcile being Christian with adoring a man so much that you don't question him and you support every single thing he says or does, and I'm having a hard time wtih that... although there are some Christian heroes of mine (sorry... none of them are emergent or liberal or "progressive") who I rarely ever question... but then they've proven themselves from years and years of ministry, etc. Obama has been President for what... 6 months?
  • kansasmennonite
    I thought there were just as many anti Obama posters here as pro. Maybe they'er just more vocal kinda like the hall protesters and Wilson't outburst.

    I'm personally against a lot of decisions he's made but the republican side is worse (in my view). I think you will have to agree though that the religious media is probably 95% against Obama and this is one site where there's some "other" side input from a christian perspective. Can you tell me one religious radio or televsion program that isn't extreme right?

    If you would read some of Wallis's books he puts plenty of blame on democrats also. Reading his books is what got me interested in this site. Have you read any?
  • WitnessforPeace
    "Faith community" that's a good question.  As Jim uses it, it's merely "religious folk who agree with me on the politics of the moment."  I wish they were trying to reach people.  And, to be fair, many if not most of these folks are good Christians.  As for others on the Christian left, Tony Campolo is a little less political and lot more "what can YOU do" in YOUR life when he talks, rather than Jim: "what the government can do because you've signed a petition or attended a rally."
    Or, to put it another way, Jim is good as an outsider, and that's about it.
    As for Obama's first 8 months: there's a lot of pent-up anger over Bush.  And even though Clinton was liberal, he wasn't anything like Obama.  Remember welfare reform?  And balancing the budget?!
    Blessings,
    Witness4Peace (that's how I write it on Twitter)
    www.joyfulreality.blogspot.com
  • letjusticerolldown
    Wallis lays out three fundamentals: "reform as a moral issue, affordable coverage for all, and no federal funding of abortion."

    Do you agree with these. Could a broader coalition be built on these? If not these, then what?
  • Lord_Voldemort
    Is reform a moral issue? At the risk of making people's head explode, I'll say no -- at least not in any way that matters to building a coalition. Remember, Obama doesn't just have a moral aspiration, he has a specific plan with health care exchanges and some sort of public option. Close to half of the American public is uneasy with the public option. If he wants to build a coalition that will pass a specific bill, he'll need to drop the public option. I'd go so far as to say that dropping the public option is in itself a moral issue.

    Affordable coverage for all is a worthy goal. Perfection is seldom attainable and that still leaves us to figure out just how universal coverage is to be achieved.

    I disagree with the President on abortion, not because I think it should be covered, but because I don't think he's being entirely forthcoming on just how it will be handled. Barack Obama has a huge credibility gap here, as well as on financing, on the prospects for future rationing, and on illegal immigrants. He did nothing to close the gaps on any of these.

    That's one for three, a great batting average in baseball, not so good for big legislative battles.

    LV
  • letjusticerolldown
    You seem opposed to establishing any shared moral commitment with someone that might end up advocating a different policy expression of the moral commitment. How do we analyze, synthesize, and reformulate competing policy solutions to the greatest moral end if we are unwilling to establish a common moral ground? The purpose of a moral claim isn't to bolster one's policy ideals is it??????
  • lumens
    "You seem opposed to establishing any shared moral commitment with someone that might end up advocating a different policy expression of the moral commitment."

    Well, if the moral commitment is a bill that will not fund abortions, and the policy expression of that moral commitment is a bill that will fund abortions, isn't his opposition reasonable? If Wallis continues to support a Democratic health plan (which is a foregone conclusion) that funds abortion, isn't it reasonable to conclude that we do not, in reality, share moral ground?
  • letjusticerolldown
    I think we have some options.

    A. We can refuse to commit to common moral principles and refuse to govern the nation.
    B. We can commit to common moral principles and refuse to govern.
    C. We can refuse to commit to common morals and govern based on political battle for power
    D. We can commit to common moral principles and govern

    If the VA offers female soldiers contraceptions and you morally oppose contraception--do we walk away from the responsibilty of governing the nation's military, foreign policy, and military engagements?

    The healthcare systems of this nation exist today. They will exist tomorrow. Abortion exists today. Abortion will exist tomorrow. They are related issues. They are not the same issue.

    Conservatives are taking the stance they can't work on healthcare reform unless in incorporates everything they want on immigration, abortion, taxation, and God knows what else.

    One might be tempted to think they don't want to govern and that they don't want to commit to any common moral principles

    From the party of moral principle and responsibility
  • lumens
    "If the VA offers female soldiers contraceptions and you morally oppose
    contraception--do we walk away from the responsibilty of governing the
    nation's military, foreign policy, and military engagements?"

    Nope.

    "The healthcare systems of this nation exist today. They will exist
    tomorrow. Abortion exists today. Abortion will exist tomorrow. They are
    related issues. They are not the same issue."

    Okay.

    "Conservatives are taking the stance they can't work on healthcare reform
    unless in incorporates everything they want on immigration, abortion,
    taxation, and God knows what else."

    No they are not. More to the point, this certainly isn't the stance LV is
    taking. His stance is that you cannot work with someone to achieve a moral
    platform if that person will accept a result that directly contradicts the
    platform. This is irrefutable.
  • Ashleigh101
    Very well said. It's good to see a Christian who is being discerning and not just being a mindless follower of someone just because he's the President. More Christians need to be discerning and also need to think more, rather than just blindly buy into the liberal media and their spin on things, or just believe every word out of Obama's mouth.

    Like you said, Obama has a big credibility problem. His voting record alone (on abortion) is enough to make one question whether it'll be covered in his health bill. His partnership with Planned Parenthood and the promises he made them while campaigning, his overturning (rescinding?) of the Mexico Policy, etc... all are part of the reason he's got this credibility gap.

    I think when it comes to illegal immigrants, eventually, they will be covered because they will no longer be illegal. I mean, honestly, no hospital is going to turn them away... now that would be a moral issue. So what's going to happen when they use the emergency room once Obamacare is in effect? If they are not covered, then will they be denied that care? Seems to me they'd be better off with the way things are now where they are not denied care.
  • kansasmennonite
    Quote:"More Christians need to be discerning and also need to think more, rather than just blindly buy into the liberal media and their spin on things, or just believe every word out of Obama's mouth. "

    I hope you haven't blindly followed the religious right and rightwing media with their spin!

    I don't listen to Rush anymore but today caught a little bit and he talked about Obama's speech for 9-11 and Rush said that Obama's community service is one step away from facism. (Obama was apparently talking about volunteering for community service and this was Rush's take). How can anyone stand to listen to this crap anymore?
  • lumens
    "I don't listen to Rush anymore but today caught a little bit and he talked about Obama's speech for 9-11 and Rush said that Obama's community service is one step away from facism."

    No he didn't. He said that Obama's definition of community service is service to his agenda, and that this one of the baby steps toward fascism. Obama certainly does seem to regard service as an extension of his administration (hence the weird school assignment) so I don't think this statement is unwarranted.

    Incidentally, if you really listened to Rush, and remembered "baby steps toward fascism" as "one step away from fascism", it would seem to me that you weren't listening with any sort of open ear. I wouldn't expect that he would change your mind, but you should at least try to be aware of what he is saying, if only to be an educated critic of his advocacy.
  • kansasmennonite
    I only listened for a couple of minutes. I do stand corrected in that he used the word baby.

    Lumens, are you a regular listener? He probably repeated what he said 20 times during his 2 hr stint. I used to listen to him but got tired of his constant talking, not inviting opposing views, etc. I feel sorry for the people who blindly follow him. He did twist Obama's messaage of community service and I don't see how the school assignment was a bad thing. Volunteer service is something we need more of and not less and Rush shouldn't call this into question. Rush looks out for himself and his interests-that's all. He's all about smear campaign and he enjoys what he can get people to do for him. It's a contest for him.
  • kansasmennonite
    I believe I was too easy on Rush. I think he has done the most damage to the sort of christian service and what a christian should do of anyone out there currently. His constant smearing of what he considers liberal just goes on and on and on and on. (abosutely no respect for anyone with an opposite view). He wants no opposition on his show-that's why he doesn't interview people. He rants and raves about things that affect people such as the minimum wage. People believe him, listen to him, and worship him. I have trouble discussing things where the other party has listened to him. I mentioned minimum wage. People become all unglued when the subject comes up. Like I said, I think he has done more damage than good.
  • jonabark
    Like he really had a chance to win you over, if only he considered the issues more carefully. But, surprise, surprise. LV once again lines up against the nefarious public option with all the other brilliant Christians like Beck, Limbaugh and Oreilly trying to free Americans once and for all from the tyrrany of factual information and government by socialists and evil liberal pedophiles and baby killers, which is the inherent character of all who disagree with these American heroes.

    By the way isn't saying "close to half oppose", the same as saying the majority supports. How is that evidence against popular support? Reminds me of old Wormtongue.
blog comments powered by Disqus
click here for comments tech support
advertise here
  • MOST VIEWED
  • MOST COMMENTED
  • MOST RECENT
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here


HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE  
SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US  
Sojourners | 3333 14th Street NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010  
Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net  
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2008