Thursday, August 21, 2008

More on Obama and Infanticide

Following up on the post Above My Pay Grade?, here's a transcript of Obama on the floor of the Illinois Senate speaking in opposition to the Born Alive Infant Protection Act of 2002. Here is what he said:
As I understand it, this puts the burden on the attending physician who has determined, since they were performing this procedure, that, in fact, this is a nonviable fetus; that if that fetus, or child - however way you want to describe it - is now outside the mother's womb and the doctor continues to think that it's nonviable but there's, let's say, movement or some indication that, in fact, they're not just coming out limp and dead, that, in fact, they would then have to call a second physician to monitor and check off and make sure that this is not a live child that could be saved.
It's one thing to convince yourself that a baby inside the womb is a "fetus" and therefore "nonviable." However once the baby is born, he/she is no longer a "fetus" but a child deserving all the help that our medical community can offer. But Obama doesn't even want to call the baby a child or call in a second doctor to make sure that this is a live child, which could be saved, because that would be too big a burden on the original decision to end the life. Hear the audio here.

In other words, if a baby is scheduled for an abortion and the baby happens to come out alive, not limp or dead, then they should die because that was the original intent of the procedure. I guess it's not surprising coming from a father who believes that if his own daughters make a mistake he doesn't want them "punished" with a baby.

(HT: Redstate)

Update: For more detailed information see the article, Jill Stanek and the National Right to Life vs. Barack Obama. They provide another quote from Barack Obama refusing to call a baby born alive a child because that would mean that get equal protection under the law,
"Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we’re really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a — a child, a nine-month-old — child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it — it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute."
"If this is a child?" What else could a baby born alive possibly be Senator Obama?

No comments: