by Mike Dorning
Barack Obama was the favorite presidential candidate in an Internet poll of supporters of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, an abortion rights group that also places a heavy emphasis on other reproductive health issues such as sex education and access to contraceptives.
Obama received votes from 42 percent of those who voted, besting rivals Hillary Clinton and John Edwards. Members of Planned Parenthood were invited to vote after Obama, Clinton and Edwards' wife Elizabeth spoke at a forum last Tuesday in Washington. The speeches were posted on the group's web site and members were allowed to vote through Friday, a spokeswoman said.
Obama's commitment to a robust sex education curriculum was highlighted by a minor controversy that erupted during the period of the Internet poll.
During his speech at the Planned Parenthood forum, Obama made reference to a controversy during his 2004 Senate race in which Republican opponent Alan Keyes criticized him for supporting legislation mandating an expanding sex education curriculum in Illinois schools reaching down to kindergarten.
Obama reaffirmed his support for an "age-appropriate" sex education curriculum including kindergarten at the forum. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney picked up on the comment, blasting Obama for supporting any form of sex education at such a young age.
All three of the campaigns expressed strong support for abortion rights at the forum, promising to appoint Supreme Court Justices that would uphold the Roe v. Wade decision finding a constitutional guarantee of a right to an abortion.
And despite majority public support for the current federal ban on "partial-birth abortion," all three candidates oppose the ban.
The poll will not determine the endorsement of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, a spokeswoman said. The group's endorsement will be recommened by its board of directors and ratified by the memership, said the spokeswoman, who declined to be identified.
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Countdown to the Knuckledragging rightwingers who care about your life.....right up till the moment you are born
4.....3....2...1..DING DING DING!
Posted by: John E | July 23, 2007 3:23 PM
I agree, John E. Every woman should be in charge of her own reproductive decisions. It will be a sad day if Roe v Wade is ever overturned. What the Knuckledragging rightwingers don't understand that if Roe v Wade is overturned, abortions will still be performed, but not in a safe environment for women. Women who can afford to travel will go overseas if an abortion is necessary, while poor women will either have unplanned children or back alley abortions.
Posted by: Janstress | July 23, 2007 5:12 PM
People claim Hillary is experienced because she was first lady for 8 years- during that time, she tried to resolve one of the most important issues facing America (HEALTHCARE) and FAILED !
People claim she's experienced because she's a second term (JUNIOR) Senator- as Senator she was confronted with the most important 'Presidential' decision ever brought before her (GOING TO WAR) and she judged WRONGLY !
While everything Barack "Blessing' Obama touches turns to gold, everything Hillary touches turns to disaster; whether it's recommending people for pardon, NAFTA or outsourcing American jobs.
I read a very decent response at: http://www.irishamericansforobama/response_to_susan_estrich.html
Posted by: Seb | July 23, 2007 6:03 PM
Wow, 42%! On an INTERNET "poll". How impressive! The Obama express is baaaack on track.
Meanwhile, in the world of actual polls, the latest Quinnipiac Poll has Obama a huge 22 points down to Clinton (36%-14%) among Florida Democrats.
Posted by: Bruce | July 23, 2007 6:40 PM
Gee Seb, I don't recall Hillary ever being President before, when did this happen?
Posted by: John E | July 23, 2007 6:55 PM
RNC Bought and Paid for Bruce,
What does a poll have to do with this post story?
....and if you're going to continue to pull polls out of your backside make sure you remind everyone who is leading for the Republican nomination:
Republican Presidential Candidates as of 7-23-07
---------------------
None of the Above - 28%
Rudy Gigoloiani - 22%
The Other Guys - 19%
Hollywood Fred Thompson - 15%
Tom Tancredo - 0.01%
Posted by: John E | July 23, 2007 7:24 PM
Enlightened libs, take you best shot at the following:
You want to keep the right to abortion,
...then be ready to abandon the right of the mother to sue for child support. She made the choice to bring the child into the world, not the man.
.... then be ready to legalize prostitution and drug use. If it's a woman's (or man's) body to choose to do with it as they please, then abolish those laws.
.... then be ready to file only one count of homicide against a defendant when a pregnant woman is murdered.
.... then abandon the right to prosecute a woman who does harm to her fetus by participating in excessive drug and/or achohol use.
Posted by: Terry | July 23, 2007 8:54 PM
Obama can keep his mitts off my public school kindergartener's education. Some school teachers are the last source one would want for sex education, especially in such a young age. Obama can do a lot better by having his vaunted public schools try to succeed at the teaching the Three R's and behavior, something many of them are less than successful at currently. Too many politicians want to tinker with public schools while sending their own children to protected private schools.
Posted by: Addison | July 23, 2007 10:20 PM
Really, John E., the folks at the Elgin Mental Health Center are awaiting your return. Or since you like Streamwood so much, there also is a clinic there for people with behavioral problems. Please, for the sake of mummy and duddy, check them out!
Posted by: John D | July 23, 2007 11:12 PM
*Abortion Rights Activists Back Barack "Hussein" Obama*
Duhhhh...
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | July 24, 2007 12:43 AM
You want to keep the right to abortion,
...then be ready to abandon the right of the mother to sue for child support. She made the choice to bring the child into the world, not the man.
Posted by: Terry | July 23, 2007 8:54 PM
What a hate filled comment. Aren't you implying that women should understand that the "man" won't be there when the child is born?
Posted by: Mrs. Jesus | July 24, 2007 3:36 AM
"John E" says:
"What does a poll have to do with this post story?"
If "John E." was capable of reading the English language, he'd notice that Mike Dorning's whole article is based on an internet "poll". The words "internet poll" in the first sentence should have been enough for most 4th graders to figure out that yes, this post has something to do with a poll.
The RNC should be paying "John E." for his postings, in order to make leftwingers look especially moronic.
Posted by: Bruce | July 24, 2007 10:21 AM
Terry,
Let's insert the name of your closes female loved one in this sentance:
"My beloved (loved one) was gang raped and then molested by uncle(?) but it must be God's will that her child be brought into this world."
Right?
Your mother, sister, wife, daughter. And you being the superior person you are (it ain't happening to you) qualified to tell women what to do with their bodies.
Right?
Posted by: Doug Zook | July 24, 2007 1:10 PM
"You want to keep the right to abortion,
...then be ready to abandon the right of the mother to sue for child support. She made the choice to bring the child into the world, not the man."
Posted by: Terry | July 23, 2007 8:54 PM
First of all Terry, as the saying goes, "It takes 2 to tango". The man is equally responsible for the pregnancy.
Now,just hypothetically, and not necessarily meant just for Terry. I don't know of any such cases, but you would think there must have been one somewhere.
But say a man and a woman have an unwanted pregnancy on there hands. The man is anti-abortion and wants to keep the child. The woman does not want to carry the child and wishes an abortion. Does the man have rights to the child? His DNA is involved also, not just the woman's.
Say he was offering to raise the child himself and the woman could walk away "free and clear" after the birth with no responsibility.
What say you to such a scenario?
I await all responses.
p.s. For the record I am pro-choice but only on a basic level during the early stages of pregnancy.
Posted by: Steve | July 24, 2007 1:44 PM
Mrs. Jesus,
Is that the best you can do? "Hate filled comment"?
If you can't see the inconsistancy in the today's laws, then re-read my questions - slowly.
Doug,
I guess you never heard of the 80/20 rule or in this case the 98/2 rule.
In the case of rape or incest - in which the woman did not have no control over her body, I would approve of the abortion.
With softballs like that, I think you are part of the Sox bullpen.
Steve,
Wrong. Let's walk thru the hypothetical case of Jack and Jill go up the hill on New Years Eve, but not to fetch a pail of water. - This is where it "takes two to tango", every moment after that, all the decisions are the womans.
On Valentines Day, Jill bumps into Jack and says "the rabbit died" and your Elmer Fudd.
This expands on your question Steve - fiour things can happen.
Neither wants the child, an abortion occurs.
Both want the child, a birth takes place.
If the woman wants the child and the man doesn't, the woman gives birth and the man is socked with paternity pymts for the next 18 years. Woman had 100% of the choice to carry the child full-term, man pays for 18 yrs.
To expand on Steve's case, the man wants the child, but the woman doesn't - two things could happen. First, the woman, if she chooses, could carry the child full-term and hand the child over to the father. The other option is that the woman says she doesn't want to deal with the pregnancy and decides to abort. Both scenarios, 100% woman's choice.
Posted by: Terry | July 24, 2007 7:26 PM
damn i need homework answers this ain't help'n
Posted by: vince | January 30, 2008 5:49 PM