Category Archives: Abortion

Obama and Live Birth Abortion

Abortion is a topic that I hate to get into, it is one issue that draws out the irrational passions on both sides of the aisle, that it is impossible to leave a discussion of it with a satisfied and productive feeling.   Additionally, it is a topic that I think too much emphasis is placed on by the right, for many it is the ONLY issue that matters and I find that going a little too far for an issue that is hardly a scourge in our country.

All that being said, I came across a post this morning on Race 4 2008 by Kavon Nikrad that discussed a very, very disturbing stance by Barack Obama on live birth abortions.  Jill Stanek from World Net Daily (a site I am not a huge fan of by the way) gives us the following:

As a nurse at an Illinois hospital in 1999, I discovered babies were being aborted alive and shelved to die in soiled utility rooms. I discovered infanticide.

Legislation was presented on the federal level and in various states called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. It stated all live-born babies were guaranteed the same constitutional right to equal protection, whether or not they were wanted.

BAIPA sailed through the U.S. Senate by unanimous vote. Even Sens. Clinton, Kennedy and Kerry agreed a mother’s right to “choose” stopped at her baby’s delivery.

The bill also passed overwhelmingly in the House. NARAL went neutral on it. Abortion enthusiasts publicly agreed that fighting BAIPA would appear extreme. President Bush signed BAIPA into law in 2002.

But in Illinois, the state version of BAIPA repeatedly failed, thanks in large part to then-state Sen. Barack Obama. It only passed in 2005, after Obama left.

I testified in 2001 and 2002 before a committee of which Obama was a member.

Obama articulately worried that legislation protecting live aborted babies might infringe on women’s rights or abortionists’ rights. Obama’s clinical discourse, his lack of mercy, shocked me. I was naive back then. Obama voted against the measure, twice. It ultimately failed.

In 2003, as chairman of the next Senate committee to which BAIPA was sent, Obama stopped it from even getting a hearing, shelving it to die much like babies were still being shelved to die in Illinois hospitals and abortion clinics.

Chicago Sun Times

 She continues:

Obama insinuated opposition to abortion is based only on religion, lecturing pro-lifers like me to “explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.”

I don’t recall mentioning religion when I testified against live-birth abortion. I only recall describing a live aborted baby I held in a hospital soiled utility room until he died, and a live aborted baby who was accidentally thrown into the trash.

Neither do I recall religion being brought into the partial-birth abortion ban debate. I recall comparisons made to U.S. laws ensuring animals being killed are treated humanely. I recall testimony that late-term babies feel excruciating pain while being aborted.

Obama stated pro-life proposals must be “amenable to reason.”

Amenable to reason, eh?  There is absolutely nothing reasonable about supporting either partial-birth or live-birth abortion (aka infanticide), especially the latter.   How much of a heartless and horrible person do you have to be to support such measures.  It is one thing to support abortion in the first trimester when the baby is barely formed (although I would never support it), but to think it is  acceptable when the baby is fully developed or even “officially alive” is preposterous and shows a complete lack of judgement on the part of Barack Obama and others like him. 

I am not one to allow one single issue to dictate my vote for President, I prefer to look at the candidate as a whole and then decide, but this is one instance that is a complete deal breaker.  It is my impression that Obama is a good person (and Hillary is not), for me that is a big deal.  I want someone with integrity leading our country.  However, good judgement and upholding some sort of a moral standard is absolutely essential and that takes more than integrity and being a good person, one’s policies make a difference.

Assuming the claims made in this article are true, Barack Obama has a lot to answer for and if he indeeds supports such positions he is no longer tied with McCain for my top choice of those remaining, but now even Hillary would prove to be a better option.   Live or partial birth abortion is never acceptable, never.

Advertisements

28 Comments

Filed under Abortion, Barack Obama, Election 2008, Hillary Clinton, Law, Politics

Romney Gets Feisty

Over the weekend, Mitt Romney entered into a heated discussion with Iowa radio host Jan Mickelson. The interview started to get heated when Mickelson pressed Romney on his former pro-choice stance and how it correlates to Mormonism. For Romney, who is usually very structured and, almost, scripted in everything he says, this is one of the few times that we will get to see him this exposed and it is wonderfully refreshing. I, for one, loved seeing this. He stood up for what he believes, he would not cower or skirt the questions posed. He was absolutely right to say that it is not his place to discuss the LDS Church’s stance on abortion. He was right when he said that simply being pro-choice does not subject one to Church discipline. In no way is/was Romney distancing himself from the Church. One of the things the Church prides itself on is “teaching correct principles and allowing the people to govern themselves.” People have the right to choose what to believe, the Church will not punish/discipline an individual for personal belief. The church disciplines members for their actions. There is nothing wrong in the Church’s eyes for one to be pro-choice, there is something wrong if one participates in the carrying out of an abortion (with the exception of incest, rape, or the life of the mother is in jeopardy).

Where Romney hit a home run was when he said, “You do not understand my faith like I do, so give me for the moment, the benefit of the doubt that having been a leader in my Church, a Bishop and a Stake President, I understand my Church better than you do…” And then he procedes to explain the Church’s position. He was bold, steadfast, and unshakable. He refused to both distance himself from the Church and to apologize for his and the Church’s stances on abortion.

For those of you who are not too familiar with the Church, the office of a Stake President is a high office in the Church. The Stake President is responible for a specified region of the Church, it usually makes up 8-14 different congregation. In Utah the geographic area of a stake may be a neighborhood, but in the East, say Boston or Annapolis (the Stake I belong too), the areas are quite larger. Not just anyone becomes a Stake President, in order to be called to this position one must have extremely strong leadership abilities, understand church doctrines, be a local representative of the Church, and be completely worthy and have a high moral character. Stake Presidents usually know what they are talking about. Mitt Romney having been a stake president more than qualifies him as being an expert on Church doctrine, practices, and standards. He certainly understands the doctrines and intricacies of the Church better than Mr. Mickleson.

All in all, Romney was spot on and it was healthy for the electorate to see this. It shows him off the cuff and demonstrates his skills, education, and communication abilities. While there may be a few people who are put off by this, I think that ultimately it will help Romney by making him more human and real in the eyes of the voters.

1 Comment

Filed under Abortion, Christian, Christianity, Conservative, Democrats, Doctrine, Election 2008, Family, LDS, Liberal, Liberalism, Media, Mitt Romney, Mormon, Mormonism, People, Politics, Progress, Progressive, Radio, Religion, Republicans, Romney