Most people, including many of those who like President Obama’s policies, were taken aback when they learned that he won the Nobel Peace Prize. We were stunned, too, but for a different reason: it was not his short tenure as president and relative lack of accomplishments that made us wince, it was his constrained idea of what constitutes peace.
Mother Teresa won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979, and her understanding of peace was much more generous than Obama’s. She called abortion “the greatest destroyer of peace.” That is not something Obama would ever say.
We are aware of the fact that the president recently said that no federal dollars will be spent on abortion in the health care bill he intends to sign. And although the bishops understandably commended him for saying this, their plaudits didn’t last long.
On October 8, the bishops issued a letter, stating, “we remain apprehensive when amendments protecting freedom of conscience and ensuring no taxpayer money for abortion are defeated in committee votes.” In reply, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said, “there’s a law that precludes the use of federal funds for abortion that isn’t going to be changed in these health care bills.” Gibbs was referring to the Hyde Amendment.
The president, however, does not support the Hyde Amendment. Indeed, he does not support any restrictions on abortion. That’s because he doesn’t see abortion as a destroyer of peace. Which is why he is no Mother Teresa.