The truth about the "President who sees nothing wrong with leaving babies out to die"

[Mom to Aly]

This is actually what the whole thing about the Presidential nominee who has no prob with leaving babies out to die is about. If you didn't have a prob with John McCain before, I don't see how you can't after this. I find this not only deceitful, but the most disgusting of the political lies I've seen.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/04/the-next-smear-against-ob_n_116891.html

[Jennifer in MI]

See - this is why I HATE politics. I read this kind of article and I just want to stop doing my research and just live in a bubble where this kind of thing doesn't happen. It happens all the time - on both sides of the issues.

 

Ugh.

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

Thank you for this post. No matter which side of the issues each one of us are on, I think it is so important that we vote based on the real issues. I also think it is important to not only educate our children, but to help to educate ALL children regarding the tactics used to sway voters.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

This is actually what the whole thing about the Presidential nominee who has no prob with leaving babies out to die is about. If you didn't have a prob with John McCain before, I don't see how you can't after this. I find this not only deceitful, but the most disgusting of the political lies I've seen.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/04/the-next-smear-against-ob_n_116891.html

 

 

What is interesting is that Sen. McCain has been on the receiving end of such tactics. Back in 2000, Richard Hand, a SC Bush supporter and a former bible professor of mine at Bob Jones University, started a rumor during the SC primary (just before debates) that McCain had fathered a child out of wedlock with a black woman. (The McCains have an adopted daughter with darker skin than they have, and he USED photos of her to "prove" this.) Bush did NOTHING to rein in this despicable nonsense, and the lies and the backlash pushed the momentum to Bush.

 

So it's not like he doesn't know how evil this sort of thing is. But now that Karl Rove is having lunch with McCain advisers, we can expect this sort of thing and worse. At one time, I would have expected better. At least in this election, having a dark-skinned daughter won't hurt Sen. Obama any. So we don't have to worry about *that*.

[Mom to Aly]

What is interesting is that Sen. McCain has been on the receiving end of such tactics. Back in 2000, Richard Hand, a SC Bush supporter and a former bible professor of mine at Bob Jones University, started a rumor during the SC primary (just before debates) that McCain had fathered a child out of wedlock with a black woman. (The McCains have an adopted daughter with darker skin than they have, and he USED photos of her to "prove" this.) Bush did NOTHING to rein in this despicable nonsense, and the lies and the backlash pushed the momentum to Bush.

 

So it's not like he doesn't know how evil this sort of thing is. But now that Karl Rove is having lunch with McCain advisers, we can expect this sort of thing and worse. At one time, I would have expected better. At least in this election, having a dark-skinned daughter won't hurt Sen. Obama any. So we don't have to worry about *that*.

 

I remember that--I think Bush had no end to his dirty political moves. And, believe me, it wasn't just that that man did it, and Bush didn't rein it in, I'm sure he approved, if he didn't have a hand in it. He is well known for it. (I worked for the democratic party for 3 years, long, long ago, and still have lots of friends on both sides). I'm sorry to see McCain is doing the same. And this man he hired is quite disgusting, professionally and personally.

 

I think Obama is much more of a "high road" sort of person, which I greatly admire. I hope he continues that way.

[Beth in SW WA]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/04/the-next-smear-against-ob_n_116891.html

 

Huffpo?

 

Do you have another source to counter the Obama pro-infanticide claim? Huffpo irks me...

[Kelli in TN]

See - this is why I HATE politics. I read this kind of article and I just want to stop doing my research and just live in a bubble where this kind of thing doesn't happen. It happens all the time - on both sides of the issues.

 

Ugh.

 

How big is your bubble? Can I join you? I'll bring coffee and cookies. We can watch chick-flicks and let the world roll on by.

[Retired]

a newsletter endorsing partial birth abortion. He supports cruel procedures. He his very pro abortion and votes against any legislation that could be used to over turn Roe v Wade. I don't know if he believes in infanticide but whats the difference. the partial birth abortion is cruel also. He may not support infanticide but he would vote for it because he does't want abortion rights messed with. This is the fact behind all his votes.

 

Politics are ugly. This has always been the case. WE just have so many more media outlets.

[unsinkable]

a newsletter endorsing partial birth abortion. He supports cruel procedures. He his very pro abortion and votes against any legislation that could be used to over turn Roe v Wade. I don't know if he believes in infanticide but whats the difference. the partial birth abortion is cruel also. He may not support infanticide but he would vote for it because he does't want abortion rights messed with. This is the fact behind all his votes.

 

Politics are ugly. This has always been the case. WE just have so many more media outlets.

 

I think I agree with what you are saying. For me, Obama is pro-abortion. Where he draws the line does not matter to me. Is this what you mean?

[Jenny in Atl]

How big is your bubble? Can I join you? I'll bring coffee and cookies. We can watch chick-flicks and let the world roll on by.

 

Sounds wonderful. It's all too much too much of the time. :tongue_smilie:

[Jennifer in MI]

How big is your bubble? Can I join you? I'll bring coffee and cookies. We can watch chick-flicks and let the world roll on by.

 

Sounds wonderful. It's all too much too much of the time. :tongue_smilie:

 

 

Come on over. The wonderful thing about this bubble is that it expands and doesn't pop - as long as politics aren't discussed!!!

 

I'll bring the chocolate and red wine!!

[8filltheheart]

Well, I read the article, and quite honestly, I have a hard time understanding the leap from Obama's being portrayed as pro-infanticide and linking it to McCain's campaign.

 

First of all, the article is incorrect on at least one point. The following clause:093_SB1082 LRB093 10540 MKM 10794 b

1 AN ACT concerning infants who are born alive.

2 Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois,

3 represented in the General Assembly:

4 Section 5. The Statute on Statutes is amended by adding

© Nothing in this Section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being born alive, as defined in this Section.

 

was actually added to the bill and accepted as part of the amendment under Obama as chairman in March of 2003. After the amendment was accepted, the committee voted against the bill.

 

Secondly, that fact has been known for yrs. The wording to the bill which Obama voted against in March 2003 is almost identical to the federal bill which passed the US Senate 98-0 in 2002. Obviously, the federal bill did not jepardize abortion rights.

 

The nurse that pursued BAIPA in Illinois has been vocal about this and it has been known among Catholic prolifers long before Obama began campaigning for presidency.

 

ETA: Here is a quick google link to an article from Feb of 2008. The only reason this issue is being reported by the mainstream media is b/c of Obama's comments at Saddleback. These issues are not new to those in the pro-life community.

http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=26868

[The Governess]

Thanks for posting this article. There is a link within it to an interview with Relevant magazine in which Obama himself states his views on partial birth abortions. It's worth a read, too.

 

http://www.relevantmagazine.com/life_article.php?id=7591

[elizabeth]

 

http://www.law.uh.edu/healthlaw/perspectives/2006/(LH)BAIPA.pdf article and links to the law regarding this specific piece of legislation.

[8filltheheart]

http://www.law.uh.edu/healthlaw/perspectives/2006/(LH)BAIPA.pdf article and links to the law regarding this specific piece of legislation.

 

Obama has stated that he would have voted for the federal version of the bill that passed in 2002 if he had been in the senate. He voted against a virtually identical bill in Illinois in 2003 after voting for the amendment that duplicated the language.

[Kelli in TN]

Thanks for posting this article. There is a link within it to an interview with Relevant magazine in which Obama himself states his views on partial birth abortions. It's worth a read, too.

 

http://www.relevantmagazine.com/life_article.php?id=7591

 

I like his answers in this interview.

 

Strang: Based on emails we received, another issue of deep importance to our readers is a candidate’s stance on abortion. We largely know your platform, but there seems to be some real confusion about your position on third-trimester and partial-birth abortions. Can you clarify your stance for us?

 

Obama: I absolutely can, so please don’t believe the emails. I have repeatedly said that I think it’s entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother. Now, I don’t think that “mental distress†qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions.

 

The other email rumor that’s been floating around is that somehow I’m unwilling to see doctors offer life-saving care to children who were born as a result of an induced abortion. That’s just false. There was a bill that came up in Illinois that was called the “Born Alive†bill that purported to require life-saving treatment to such infants. And I did vote against that bill. The reason was that there was already a law in place in Illinois that said that you always have to supply life-saving treatment to any infant under any circumstances, and this bill actually was designed to overturn Roe v. Wade, so I didn’t think it was going to pass constitutional muster.

 

Ever since that time, emails have been sent out suggesting that, somehow, I would be in favor of letting an infant die in a hospital because of this particular vote. That’s not a fair characterization, and that’s not an honest characterization. It defies common sense to think that a hospital wouldn't provide life-saving treatment to an infant that was alive and had a chance of survival.

 

Strang: You’ve said you’re personally against abortion and would like to see a reduction in the number of abortions under your administration. So, as president, how would do you propose accomplishing that?

 

Obama: I think we know that abortions rise when unwanted pregnancies rise. So, if we are continuing what has been a promising trend in the reduction of teen pregnancies, through education and abstinence education giving good information to teenagers. That is important—emphasizing the sacredness of sexual behavior to our children. I think that’s something that we can encourage. I think encouraging adoptions in a significant way. I think the proper role of government. So there are ways that we can make a difference, and those are going to be things I focus on when I am president.

 

Now someone will come along and tell me that this magazine is also a faulty source and then I am going back in the bubble with Jennifer and Jenny and I am never coming out again!!!

 

And I wish we could have this discussion in a thread that doesn't have such a divisive title on it.

[PiCO]

This is actually what the whole thing about the Presidential nominee who has no prob with leaving babies out to die is about. If you didn't have a prob with John McCain before, I don't see how you can't after this. I find this not only deceitful, but the most disgusting of the political lies I've seen.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/04/the-next-smear-against-ob_n_116891.html

 

Now, if that article had stuck to refuting the smear video, I would have had some respect for it. But no- the article had to first smear the video's producer. Ad Hominem, anyone?

 

I'll join y'all in the bubble!

[Colleen]

Now, if that article had stuck to refuting the smear video, I would have had some respect for it. But no- the article had to first smear the video's producer.

 

Yep. Best to try and muddle one's way through the facts, rather than relying on analyses that specialize in finger-pointing and name-calling.

[Sharon in SC]

Thank you for this post. No matter which side of the issues each one of us are on, I think it is so important that we vote based on the real issues. I also think it is important to not only educate our children, but to help to educate ALL children regarding the tactics used to sway voters.

 

:iagree: I'm bringing over something I posted on the other thread that, I think, befits the discussions here: http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?p=463840#post463840

[Mrs Mungo]

I like his answers in this interview.

 

 

 

Now someone will come along and tell me that this magazine is also a faulty source and then I am going back in the bubble with Jennifer and Jenny and I am never coming out again!!!

 

And I wish we could have this discussion in a thread that doesn't have such a divisive title on it.

 

I think that article was excellent, Kelli, thanks.

[unsinkable]

So if Illinois already had a requirement that said care must be provide to infants born alive, what was the RN in the video talking about? Were there or were there not babies born who were put in rooms to die?

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

a newsletter endorsing partial birth abortion.

 

A link, please?

[Kelli in TN]

So if Illinois already had a requirement that said care must be provide to infants born alive, what was the RN in the video talking about? Were there or were there not babies born who were put in rooms to die?

 

I wondered that too. But I was afraid to say anything for fear that I was missing some really important piece of information and everyone would roll their eyes and say "Bless her heart, that Kelli tries but she is not the sharpest crayon."

 

If the law existed already were the nurses simply not following it?

[tmkclscroggins]

I believe that O'Bama is the one in favor of infanticide --not McCain.

 

m

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Now someone will come along and tell me that this magazine is also a faulty source and then I am going back in the bubble with Jennifer and Jenny and I am never coming out again!!!

 

And I wish we could have this discussion in a thread that doesn't have such a divisive title on it.

 

Weeellll, they believe this:

 

RELEVANT is a multimedia company looking to impact culture with the message that even though religion may be seen as irrelevant, a personal relationship with God is a relevant -- and vital -- aspect of a fulfilled life. We want to engage people in a conversation about faith. We want to challenge worldviews and cause people to see God outside the box they've put Him in.

 

Christians can't be complacent living in a Christian bubble and never engaging the world they live in. We want to live the way Jesus did, hanging out with the very people religious leaders turned up their nose at. Through relationship, love and understanding the world was changed. We don't believe in legalism and bigotry. We believe in dialogue -- about Truth, about faith, about freedom in Christ.

 

-------------------------------

Sorry, sweetie. No bubble for you.

 

 

And they believe this:

 

The Bible

We believe the Bible is the written Word of God. It leads us to salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. Being given by God the Scriptures are both fully and verbally inspired by God. Therefore, as originally given, the Bible is free of error in all it teaches. Each book is to be interpreted according to its context and purpose. All believers are exhorted to study the Scriptures and diligently apply them to their lives. The Scriptures are the authoritative and normative rule and guide of all Christian life, practice, and doctrine.

 

God Is Triune

There is one God: infinite, eternal, almighty, and perfect in holiness, truth, and love. In the unity of the godhead there are three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, co-existent, co-equal, co-eternal. The Father is not the Son and the Son is not the Holy Spirit, yet each is truly Deity. One God - Father, Son and Holy Spirit - is the foundation of Christian faith and life.

 

God the Father

God the Father is the Creator of heaven and earth. He is faithful to every promise, works all things together for good to those who love him, and in his unfathomable grace gave his Son Jesus Christ for mankind's redemption. He made man for fellowship with himself, and intended that all creation should live to the praise of his glory.

 

Jesus Christ

Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, was supernaturally conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary. He was perfect in nature, teaching and obedience. He is fully God and fully man. He was always with God and is God. He is the only Savior for the sins of the world, having shed his blood and died a vicarious death on Calvary's cross. By his death in our place, he revealed the divine love and upheld divine justice, removing our guilt and reconciling us to God. Having redeemed us from sin, the third day he rose bodily from the grave, victorious over death and the powers of darkness and for a period of forty days appeared to over five hundred witnesses, performing many convincing proofs of his resurrection. He ascended into heaven where, at God's right hand, he intercedes for his people and rules as Lord over all. He is the Head of his body, the Church.

 

The Holy Spirit

The Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of life, convicts the world of sin, righteousness and judgment. Through the proclamation of the gospel he persuades men to repent of their sins and confess Jesus as Lord. By the same Spirit a person is led to trust in divine mercy. The Holy Spirit unites believers to Jesus Christ in faith, brings about the new birth, and dwells within the regenerate. The Holy Spirit has come to glorify the Son who in turn came to glorify the Father. He will lead the Church into a right understanding and rich application of the truth of God’s Word.

 

The Church

The Church is not a religious institution or denomination. Rather, the Church universal is made up of those who have become genuine followers of Jesus Christ and have personally appropriated the gospel. The Church exists to worship and glorify God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It also exists to serve him by faithfully doing his will in the earth. This involves a commitment to see the gospel preached and churches planted in all the world for a testimony. The ultimate mission of the Church is the making of disciples through the preaching of the gospel.

[Retired]

[url=http://jillstanek.com/archives/2008/05/michelle_obamas.html]http://jillstanek.com/archives/2008/05/michelle_obamas.html[/uR

 

It is a campaign letter. Sorry I called it a newsletter

[8filltheheart]

Now, if that article had stuck to refuting the smear video, I would have had some respect for it. But no- the article had to first smear the video's producer. Ad Hominem, anyone?

 

I'll join y'all in the bubble!

 

Well, I have no respect for it b/c these exact same things have been being said for a long time......not originating from McCain or Hudson. Agree or disagree with what BAIPA, fine. But, to create an allegation that it is from McCain's political compaign is simply false.

 

ETA: Here is a link with Keyes referring to Obama and infanticide during his campaigning earlier this yr (Feb 5th). Absolutely refutes the implication that this is originating from McCain's campaign. Keyes has been saying this since their senate race in 2004.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xkT_W5l9-k&feature=related

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

I wondered that too. But I was afraid to say anything for fear that I was missing some really important piece of information and everyone would roll their eyes and say "Bless her heart, that Kelli tries but she is not the sharpest crayon."

 

If the law existed already were the nurses simply not following it?

 

Because honestly, if you think health care providers always follow the law, you'd be wrong. And in this case (and I'm sorry that I have to say something horrific and callous that tears me heart), who is going to sue or call them on it?

 

And because there is a school of thought that says if you provide warmth, you are prolonging the agony of the inevitable. You can't put the infant out of misery, but you will in no way prolong it. Quicker. (Crying again, and sorry I had to type that.)

 

And there are some people who cannot bear to watch, and who walk away just to stay sane. They compartmentalize. And rationalize.

 

But yes, there's a law.

[Mrs Mungo]

http://jillstanek.com/archives/2008/05/michelle_obamas.html

 

!!! All it says is that the bill should contain provisions for the health of the mother and that mothers should retain their right to privacy and not have to explain themselves to the federal government!

[kokotg]

http://jillstanek.com/archives/2008/05/michelle_obamas.html

 

The letter is consistent with Barack Obama's position on late term abortions, which is that he only opposes a ban on them if said ban doesn't contain a provision to protect the health of the mother. That's exactly what the letter linked to states.

[kokotg]

x-posted!

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

The letter is consistent with Barack Obama's position on late term abortions, which is that he only opposes a ban on them if said ban doesn't contain a provision to protect the health of the mother. That's exactly what the letter linked to states.

 

And that is why he did not vote to pass legislation banning late term abortion. He voted against it because it did nothing to protect the mother AT ALL and made it a crime for a doctor to save a mother's life in an either/or situation. (Though if one does not believe that a doctor should be able to save a mother's life in an either/or situation without going to jail, then this will not mean anything. I do realize some hold that view.)

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

I believe that O'Bama is the one in favor of infanticide --not McCain.

 

m

 

Oh, I'm fairly sure that neither of them is "in favor of infanticide."

[Renee in NC]

And that is why he did not vote to pass legislation banning late term abortion. He voted against it because it did nothing to protect the mother AT ALL and made it a crime for a doctor to save a mother's life in an either/or situation. (Though if one does not believe that a doctor should be able to save a mother's life in an either/or situation without going to jail, then this will not mean anything. I do realize some hold that view.)

 

This commonly happens, too. A "late term abortion" is not really an abortion at all, is it? It's an induction to save the life of the mother? Doctors do this - they will induce labor even drastically early (24+ weeks) when the mother's life is in danger. Eclampsia is a specific condition where this occurs.

 

I also know that some stauncy pro-lifers will not allow for surgery in the case of an ectopic pregnancy, either. That is considered murder as well.

[AnotherE]

Partial-birth abortion/late term abortion is actually an intact D & X and the purpose of it was to retain a woman's reproductive health and life. It was hardly a procedure for "convenience" because it takes 2-3 days to complete the procedure.

 

I had the fantastic opportunity to listen to a female Ob/Gyn who is well-respected in the field of women's reproductive health speak about the topic. This procedure is used in extreme circumstances where the woman's life or future reproductive health is at risk, or there are extraordinary defects of the fetus.

 

I was literally sick after the Supreme Court decision.

 

And this is why I respect Obama for not giving an inch on a woman's right to decide, with the assistance of her doctor, what is the best choice for her body.

[MyBlueLobsters]

Okay, maybe I'm missing something here...but one thing I don't understand about partial birth abortions is this....The baby has to come out either way. I don't understand how you can make a case for saving the mom's life when the baby has to come out of her body either dead or alive. I've unfortunatly seen a detail by detail account of a PBA and dead or alive, the baby comes out her va jay-jay. How does killing the baby save the mom's life? That is why I personally think that Obama's stance on protecting late term/partial birth abortions when the mothers health is in jepordy is bogus. I can't think of one health concern where having the live head pass through the va-jay jay would kill the mom, where a dead baby passing through the va-jay jay would save her life. Again...I try my best to stay out of politics...but this is one issue for me that I'm very passionate about.

[Renee in NC]

Okay, maybe I'm missing something here...but one thing I don't understand about partial birth abortions is this....The baby has to come out either way. I don't understand how you can make a case for saving the mom's life when the baby has to come out of her body either dead or alive. I've unfortunatly seen a detail by detail account of a PBA and dead or alive, the baby comes out her va jay-jay. How does killing the baby save the mom's life? That is why I personally think that Obama's stance on protecting late term/partial birth abortions when the mothers health is in jepordy is bogus. I can't think of one health concern where having the live head pass through the va-jay jay would kill the mom, where a dead baby passing through the va-jay jay would save her life. Again...I try my best to stay out of politics...but this is one issue for me that I'm very passionate about.

 

This is where I am confused - what does "late term abortion" really mean? And if it is to save the life of the mother, why does that involve "killing" the baby? Wouldn't the baby come out and die due to prematurity?:confused:

[Renee in NC]

Partial-birth abortion/late term abortion is actually an intact D & X and the purpose of it was to retain a woman's reproductive health and life. It was hardly a procedure for "convenience" because it takes 2-3 days to complete the procedure.

 

I had the fantastic opportunity to listen to a female Ob/Gyn who is well-respected in the field of women's reproductive health speak about the topic. This procedure is used in extreme circumstances where the woman's life or future reproductive health is at risk, or there are extraordinary defects of the fetus.

 

I was literally sick after the Supreme Court decision.

 

And this is why I respect Obama for not giving an inch on a woman's right to decide, with the assistance of her doctor, what is the best choice for her body.

 

I understand, but why does this involve killing to baby?

[MyBlueLobsters]

This is where I am confused - what does "late term abortion" really mean? And if it is to save the life of the mother, why does that involve "killing" the baby? Wouldn't the baby come out and die due to prematurity?

 

 

I *think* 'late term abortion' is any abortion after the baby is viable. (so 24 weeks and after)

 

 

And if it is to save the life of the mother, why does that involve "killing" the baby?

 

 

Right! I just can't see a 'good explination' for this. I think all the 'for the saftey of the mother' just makes them feel better about talking about and supporting it. JMHO

[AnotherE]

I am wary of describing medical procedures or the reasons behind them seeing as I am not a doctor and my medical ability ends at bandaids and thermometers.

 

The procedure involves collapsing the fetal skull to allow for safer removal. The risk of complication decreases dramatically compared to the risk of caesarian.

 

This is a procedure used on women carrying fetuses with hydrocephalus, where the head can be several times larger than that of a normal fetus, making vaginal delivery impossible.

 

There are many other reasons for this procedure (risks to the mother that don't manifest until later in the pregnancy/issues with the fetus that are undetectable until later pregnancy), but again, I am not a doctor and I don't feel confident in my ability to discuss every scenario.

 

I do know I want decisions regarding my health and safety to be left to me and my physician.

[lynn]

This is actually what the whole thing about the Presidential nominee who has no prob with leaving babies out to die is about. If you didn't have a prob with John McCain before, I don't see how you can't after this. I find this not only deceitful, but the most disgusting of the political lies I've seen.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/04/the-next-smear-against-ob_n_116891.html

 

Who I choose to vote for go a lot deeper than this. there are bigger issues going on than smearing someone. BIGGER issues not just I don't like who said or did this or that in this ad or voted this way on a single issue. That's all I will say about that.