WASHINGTON (RNS) Leaders from several prominent conservative Christian groups met Tuesday (March 24) with the head of the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships to discuss ways to reduce abortions.
Concerned Women for America President Wendy Wright sought the meeting with Joshua DuBois, executive director of the revamped White House office.
“It was cordial and there’s an opportunity for future meetings,” Wright said after the meeting, which lasted more than half an hour. “He did seem interested in the kinds of programs that are helping women and children.”
Conservative Christian groups have criticized the Obama administration for early policy actions such as opening federal funding to embryonic stem cell research and international family planning groups, and moving to rescind conscience protections for health care workers.
Wright, who called the freedom of conscience “fundamental to the American way of life,” said she brought up the conscience issue with DuBois and several White House staffers who attended the meeting. They also discussed programs that encourage men to be good fathers.
The White House did not respond to requests for comment. When the overhauled office was announced in February, the White House said its four target areas would be to poverty reduction, abortion reduction, responsible fatherhood and fostering interfaith dialogue with world leaders.
After DuBois agreed to the meeting in early March, Wright invited representatives of other conservative Christian groups to join her. A total of five people attended from Family Research Council, the Christian Medical Association and Care Net, a network of pregnancy centers that encourages women to continue their unexpected pregnancies.
Kristin Hansen, spokeswoman for Virginia-based Care Net, also said she hopes there will be additional meetings.
“We were grateful for the opportunity to sit down and dialogue,” she said. “We are grateful that reducing abortion is a priority for this administration. … It was a good atmosphere of listening on both sides and we hope to do it again.”
By Adelle M. Banks
Copyright 2009 Religion News Service. All rights reserved. No part of this transmission may be distributed or reproduced without written permission.
Beliefnet
Advertisement
posted March 25, 2009 at 8:12 pm
The Evangelicals are treated with respect by the Obama administration; can you imagine atheists having been treated with respect by the Bush administration?
These Evangelicals might be of value in reducing abortions by helping insure effective birth control is widely available and real sex education is taught in the schools. Think they’ll have the courage to do things like that?
posted March 25, 2009 at 8:24 pm
Talking is better than complaining. Between the White House and the Evangelicals, perhaps they can, as you mentioned nnmns, help insure effective bith control is widely available and accurate sex education is taught in schools…not just abstinence only.
posted March 25, 2009 at 11:42 pm
I have the feeling that this issue will have no resolution as long as it is a policy and procedures debate. These are women, people, requiring relationships and communication, not agenicies and directives to be realligned and differently distributed. Perhaps this has been the problem all along. Has anyone taken the time to talk with them (not TO them) about all the the issues that politicians do so love to debate. let’s move this from the legislative and political arean to the health care and human communities that have to actual be in arelationships with these folks. Keep it human!
posted March 26, 2009 at 10:20 am
The only effective way to reduce or eliminate unwanted pregnancies is to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
Until conservatives realize this and make headway in reducing unwanted pregnancies by way of comprehensive contraception and sex education, the problem will continue to exacerbate.
Peiople simply will not BE abstinent. As Ms Palin the younger said, “It’s unrealistic.” We progressives invite you conservatives to enter the real world.
posted March 26, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Your Name,
I’ll make a deal with you. I’ll wholeheartedly support government funding of comprehensive sex education and birth control if “progressives” will agree to never use the “birth control sometimes fails” justification of abortion ever again. I’ll support those two initiatives, if “progressives” will agree to an unconditional ban on abortions every time “birth control fails.” Sound like a fair compromise that you can agree with?
posted March 26, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Sounds kind of silly to me. First, birth control does sometimes fail, though probably not nearly as often as abstention. Second you are one lone conservative and you want to trade your behavior for “progressives”. Finally, when someone needs an abortion, or as I’ve been reading when her family needs for her to have an abortion, for whatever reason, she should have it.
posted March 26, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Sorry Nate, but I can’t agree to your ‘deal’ since I’ve never heard such a ‘justification’. As nnmns points out (and most intelligent people already knnow), birth control does sometimes fail. Unprotected sex almmot always fails.
An “unconditional ban on abortions” (i.e. under any circumstance, even rape or incest – not many rapists or fathers/uncles/brothers bother using birth control either, btw) is in no way a “compromise”. It’s dictating.
Sorry, but you don’t get to make that decision for other people. Nor do I.
posted March 26, 2009 at 7:45 pm
“Unconditional ban on abortions everytime “birth control fails” ” NateW
Right! I don’t think so. The only person who decides when to have an abortion is the woman (or child) involved. No one else.
posted March 27, 2009 at 10:27 am
Why on earth would anyone have to “justify” their personal reproductive health decisions to Nate W. (or anyone, for that matter) anyway?
posted April 1, 2009 at 2:51 pm
The bottom line is a dissagreement on who is the custodian of this living, growing, *insert your preferred name here* in the woman’s womb. Is it the government? Is it the woman? Is it the parents?
These are all good questions and if the debates focused on that, I think we’d get a lot further.