E-mail
Print
RSS
G-bookmarks
Live
TechnoratiIn January 2001 I had the honor and privilege of attending the inauguration of President George W. Bush. The country was ready to put the finishing touches on eight years of the Clinton Administration. The weather, much like the Obama inauguration, was freezing but the crowd of approximately 300,000 joyfully received the new president. The crowd also respectfully applauded when outgoing President Clinton and Vice-President Gore were introduced.
It was a much different scene when President Bush and Vice-President Cheney were introduced to the estimated crowd of 2 million at Obama’s inauguration. Bush was openly booed by the crowd causing even the ultra-liberal MSNBC commentators to cry “bad form.” Vice-President Chaney hurt his back earlier in the week and was forced to take the platform in a wheelchair. Many in the crowd found that to be funny, making snide comments loud enough to be picked up by nearby network and cable microphones and broadcast around the world. It was a disgusting and embarrassing display from people who had bathed in media generated Bush hatred for the last eight years.
There is no question that President Bush is limping out of office with one of the lowest approval ratings (34%) of any president in history. But how will history treat President Bush when it comes to the big issues of his presidency? Since President Bush claims to be an evangelical, how will evangelicals view his tenure in the White House?
Right out of the gate, it should be acknowledged that after the attacks of 9/11 everybody believed we would be attacked again…. everybody. Attacks took place around the world in places like Spain, England, Ireland, and India…but not in America. You have to admit that for seven years, Bush Administration policies kept America safe from terrorists. For that alone I say, thank you, Mr. President.
From an evangelical perspective President Bush should receive high marks for persistence on the life issues and for fulfilling his word to place pro-life justices on the United States Supreme Court. Early in his presidency, Bush had to decide what to do about embryonic stem-cell research. He was being pressed from the scientific community and from many high-profile celebrities to open the floodgates for full embryonic research that would have set the precedent of an “anything goes” policy; subjecting human embryos to full scientific experimentation. Instead Bush chose life by allowing research only on the lines of embryos that were already designated for that purpose. He refused to treat human embryos like laboratory rats. Throughout his presidency he stood firm against embryonic stem-cell research, vetoing a bill with bi-partisan support that cost him support in his own party. It would have been easy for Bush to cave and allow the majority to have their way with the unborn. But Bush took the high road and stood in the gap for those who could not yet stand for themselves.
President Bush re-instated the “Mexico City Policy” which prohibits federal money used overseas to provide for abortions. He pushed for and signed into law the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act that protects the lives of babies who survive abortions. He signed the Unborn Victims of Violence Act that allows prosecutors to bring charges against someone who harms a baby in the mother’s womb. He signed into law the Partial Birth Abortion Ban that forced abortion-minded physicians to step back from the brink of infanticide. For all of this and much more, President Bush deserves the cheers of pro-life evangelicals everywhere. Continue »
chica »
Agree: 
Disagree: 
