Dear John:  Want to Sew Up the Election?Paul Shelby Lewis<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
As Democrats seek to find ways to reach out to pro-lifers who, were it not for their stance on abortion, might otherwise vote "Democrat," candidates for high office are seeking ways around the issue.  On the one hand, most of their money comes from the far-far-far-left; a land where the difference between "choice" and "infanticide" is quite literally a matter of inches and seconds.  On the other hand, they realize that they will never win elections unless they appeal to centrists, many of which quickly become single issue voters when one candidate is pro-life and the other is pro-choice.  So, the challenge has loomed large:  Can Democrats keep their support on the left and still appeal to pro-lifers?   
Since his candidacy officially kicked into gear a few months back, Barak Obama has been branded by pro-life conservatives as having the most pro-choice record on the Senate (100% according to some).  On any other issue, such branding would likely have little effect.  But this one could have dire consequences for the Obama campaign if he does not paint a better picture for single issue voters. 
So, Obama has taken the position of being personally opposed to abortion but legislatively pro-choice.  Such a personal and moral decision, says Obama, is best left to the pregnant woman, her family, her doctor, and her pastor.  This tactic, he hopes, will abate some of the concerns of pro-lifers while giving a subtle wink to the likes of NOW and NARAL.  In point of fact, almost any way Obama shapes that message will be light-years ahead of John Kerry's pathetic attempt to give a heart-felt pro-life yet pro-choice answer in the 2004 debates.  And given Obama's ability to out-slick even the wife of the slick-master, he just might pull it off.
Why?  Well, thanks to Kant's separation of the noumenal (wherein lies morality) and the phenomenal (the world of appearances) we now live in an environment wherein we separate faith from reason, religion and science, or personal morality from public policy.  So it is perfectly normal for a candidate to say, "What I do in my personal life has no bearing on my political life."  And the masses celebrate such an "open-minded" position.
The bottom line, however, is that both John McCain and the American people as a whole have not been smart enough or adept enough to challenge Obama on such a claim.  Please, Senator McCain, as soon as the Olympics are over and people are paying attention to politics again, ask Senator Obama why he is personally opposed to abortion?  Is it because he personally believes that abortion is the taking of innocent life (murder)?  And if so, what kind of man calls an act murder on a personal level, but would allow it if the decision is made between a woman and her doctor?
If, on the other hand, he believes that the fetus is potential human life, McCain needs to ask two questions.  First of all, if conception is not the moment that life begins, when is it?  Obama was asked a similar question at the compassion forum in 2006, where he began waxing philosophical about the mystery of the beginnings of human life and about the power of potential human life.  Of course, no CNN panelist was going to challenge him, so allow us the pleasure (with thanks to Peter Kreeft):  Isn't it criminal negligence to kill something that might be a human?  If I shot at what I thought was a deer, knowing full well there was a possibility that kids were playing in that area, and ended up killing a child, I'd go to jail for manslaughter.  Yet we snuff out a being that may or may not yet be a human life (we don't know, remember) and we call it choice.  Why the disconnect?
The fact is that Obama, on this issue more than any other, is lying about his position on abortion to appease social conservatives.  If he really believes the life (or potential life, as he might say) of a fetus is precious enough for him to personally protect, then he is a coward for not doing the same legislatively.  We can debate the government's role when it comes to homosexual issues, gun rights, and even drugs; but to hide behind the "personal v. private" debate on such an issue is political maneuvering at its worst.  If Senator Obama truly feels about the unborn what he claims, then standing behind the wall of "personal morality" is downright criminal.  When debate time comes, McCain needs to hammer him on this issue.  Given that the majority of single issue voters are pro-life, pulling the wool off of their collective eyes might be the only way for McCain to sew up the election.