A Conflicted Confluence

True to his word, President Obama has made good on two campaign promises. Within the last 24 hours, he signed two executive orders: the first orders a cessation of torturing imprisoned terrorists (even if they are known to have information that could save American lives), and the second orders a renewal of funding international abortion clinics with American tax dollars. How is it possible that the fundamental concepts underlying these two orders can co-exist in one man's mind? The confluence of those two ideals should be like water and oil, unable to commingle for long.
On the one hand, there is the concept that torture is not acceptable under any circumstances, that two wrongs don't make a right, that human decency and dignity won't stoop to torture a fellow human being, no matter how bad his behavior has been, no matter who or how many he has hurt, no matter how heinous his crimes. On the other hand, there is the concept that there is no immorality in aborting an unborn child, no matter how innocent, no matter what potential that baby may have, no matter what reason the mother may give, no matter what alternatives to abortion may exist.
Shame on you, Senator Kerry, who was quoted as saying "Today's announcement is a very powerful signal to our neighbors around the world that the United States is once again back in the business of good public policy and and idealogy no longer blunts our ability to save lives around the globe."
Shame on you, Mr. President, and shame on our society for collectively supporting abortion. Make no mistake, we will all one day have to answer to God, not collectively, but individually, for the causes we campaign for, the choices we make, the decisions we support, and the idealogies we vote for.