Welcome to The Conservative Cave©!Join in the discussion! Click HERE to register.
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Obama Campaign Ad Targets Abortion Survivor(CNSNews.com) - In response to a political ad noting that Barack opposed a bill protecting babies who survive late-term abortions, the Obama campaign has produced an ad of its own, accusing the woman speaking in the ad -- herself a late-term abortion survivor -- of telling “a despicable lie.†*snip*While Obama was in the Illinois State Senate, bills introduced in 2001, 2002 and 2003 were designed to ensure that newborns who survived abortions would be treated as a “person†with a right to the same equal protection of the law as any other person under the 14th Amendment.When the bill came up in 2001, Obama voted “present,†which in the Illinois Senate had the same effect as a “no†vote.In 2002, when the bill came up again, Obama voted “no.â€*snip*“I do want to just make sure everybody in the Senate knows what this bill is about, as I understand it,†Obama said. “Senator O’Malley, the testimony during the committee indicated that one of the key concerns was -- is that there was a method of abortion, where the -- the fetus or child, as -- as some might describe it, is still temporarily alive outside the womb. And one of the concerns that came out in the testimony was the fact they were not being properly cared for during this brief period of time that they were still living. Is that correct?â€Obama went on to question whether the law would pass constitutional muster if the “child … temporarily alive outside the womb†was called a “person.â€
Obama went on to question whether the law would pass constitutional muster if the “child … temporarily alive outside the womb†was called a “person.â€
Obama and other opponents say the state already had a law to protect aborted fetuses born alive and considered able to survive. "Now votes taken out of context, accusing Obama of letting infants die? It's a despicable lie," Obama's ad states. The independent ad is being aired by BornAliveTruth.org, specifically targeting two key presidential campaign battleground markets, Albuquerque, N.M., and Cleveland.
Some say an Illinois law already exists to protect live-born infants. Is this true?410 ILCS 535/1(5) has been cited by opponents to an Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act as the state’s legal definition of “born aliveâ€. But this is a provision of vital records – for census – and has nothing to do with criminal law.
Palatine, Illinois, resident Elizabeth Ehlert was twice convicted of murdering her newborn daughter in 1990 at delivery, alone in her bedroom. But in 2002, an Illinois appeals court determined, “[T]he single, short cry the witness [boyfriend] thought he heard, if it occurred, may have occurred before complete separation from the mother, and therefore it is not sufficient to prove live birth. Because the evidence cannot support a finding beyond a reasonable doubt of live birth, we must reverse the conviction.â€According to Legal Affairs magazine, reporting on the Ehlert case in its September/October 2004 issue:“Illinois common law holds that a baby is not a person until it has established a life independent of its mother. The separation doctrine… according to the Illinois Supreme Court, holds that "a fetus must be totally expelled from the mother and show a clear sign of independent vitality" before it can be considered to have been born.â€Added the Daily Herald on September 17, 2003, “Attorneys for Cook Co. State’s Attorney Richard Devine… said given current forensic and medical technology, the 183-year-old law no longer makes sense and should be overturned. ’What you have here is the horrific scenario in which a mother who doesn’t want her baby delivers the baby, the baby is out and still connected by the cord, and under the complete separation doctrine… she can kill that baby,’ said Peter D. Fischer, an assistant Cook Co. state’s attorney. ‘She can stab it, she can strangle it, do anything and it’s not murder. This killing of a full-term, 6-pound, 19-inch long baby is nothing, and we believe that rule cannot stand in the modern age.’â€
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.
The seven votes were on proposals that abortion opponents have successfully passed in other places. Two bills outlawed the late-term procedure that opponents call partial-birth abortion. Two bills required parental notification for minors seeking abortions. Three bills were for so-called "born alive" legislation, which require doctors to administer medical care to aborted fetuses that survive the abortion process in hopes that the fetuses can survive. No one questions that Obama opposed the seven pieces of legislation; indeed, he is mentioned in news reports from the time as being against several of the measures.
I tried to click on the link and the article wasn't there for me temporarily, so I looked it up elsewhere. http://www.newsday.com/services/newspaper/printedition/sunday/news/ny-txtcamp5851623sep21,0,4966919.storyQuoteObama and other opponents say the state already had a law to protect aborted fetuses born alive and considered able to survive. "Now votes taken out of context, accusing Obama of letting infants die? It's a despicable lie," Obama's ad states. The independent ad is being aired by BornAliveTruth.org, specifically targeting two key presidential campaign battleground markets, Albuquerque, N.M., and Cleveland.What Obama is claiming is a lie is that he lets infants die. His argument for that is that Illinois already had a state law. I think he misses the point though. The federal should have been okayed by him too.
QuoteObama Campaign Ad Targets Abortion SurvivorObama went on to question whether the law would pass constitutional muster if the “child … temporarily alive outside the womb†was called a “person.â€MORE
Obama Campaign Ad Targets Abortion SurvivorObama went on to question whether the law would pass constitutional muster if the “child … temporarily alive outside the womb†was called a “person.â€
She doesn't know what the hell she's talking about yet again. From what I know, he voted against the state bill that would allow the babies that survived medical care - he said he didn't want to "burden the woman". There's an audio out with him saying just that, leave it to that empty suit to think calling an abortion survivor a liar is a good campaign strategy.http://www.bornalivetruth.org/
Got a less biased source?
Obama opposed the 2001 and 2002 "born alive" bills as backdoor attacks on a woman's legal right to abortion, but he says he would have been "fully in support" of a similar federal bill that President Bush had signed in 2002, because it contained protections for Roe v. Wade.We find that, as the NRLC said in a recent statement, Obama voted in committee against the 2003 state bill that was nearly identical to the federal act he says he would have supported.
Quote from: Tess Anderson on September 23, 2008, 05:29:48 PMShe doesn't know what the hell she's talking about yet again. From what I know, he voted against the state bill that would allow the babies that survived medical care - he said he didn't want to "burden the woman". There's an audio out with him saying just that, leave it to that empty suit to think calling an abortion survivor a liar is a good campaign strategy.http://www.bornalivetruth.org/Got a less biased source?
Quote from: Lanie on September 23, 2008, 06:02:40 PMQuote from: Tess Anderson on September 23, 2008, 05:29:48 PMShe doesn't know what the hell she's talking about yet again. From what I know, he voted against the state bill that would allow the babies that survived medical care - he said he didn't want to "burden the woman". There's an audio out with him saying just that, leave it to that empty suit to think calling an abortion survivor a liar is a good campaign strategy.http://www.bornalivetruth.org/Got a less biased source? I take it the 3 I posted weren't good enough?
-- is that there was a method of abortion, where the -- the fetus or child, as -- as some might describe it, is still temporarily alive outside the womb. And one of the concerns that came out in the testimony was the fact they were not being properly cared for during this brief period of time that they were still living. Is that correct?â€
QuoteObama went on to question whether the law would pass constitutional muster if the “child … temporarily alive outside the womb†was called a “person.â€Of, fer ****'s sake! I guess leaving a baby to die in the woods somewhere is justifiable then because since it is only alive temporarily outside the womb, it's not a person.
Quote from: jinxmchue on September 23, 2008, 10:56:13 PMQuoteObama went on to question whether the law would pass constitutional muster if the “child … temporarily alive outside the womb†was called a “person.â€Of, fer ****'s sake! I guess leaving a baby to die in the woods somewhere is justifiable then because since it is only alive temporarily outside the womb, it's not a person.Animal control prosecutes people who leave litters of kittens or puppies in garbage cans or in the woods alone to die. Yet this monster thinks it's okay to leave babies to die. I'm not sure there is a word in the dictionary that can define what I feel about him.
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Matthew 25:40 KJV
Quote from: MrsSmith on September 23, 2008, 07:25:36 PMQuote from: Lanie on September 23, 2008, 06:02:40 PMQuote from: Tess Anderson on September 23, 2008, 05:29:48 PMShe doesn't know what the hell she's talking about yet again. From what I know, he voted against the state bill that would allow the babies that survived medical care - he said he didn't want to "burden the woman". There's an audio out with him saying just that, leave it to that empty suit to think calling an abortion survivor a liar is a good campaign strategy.http://www.bornalivetruth.org/Got a less biased source? I take it the 3 I posted weren't good enough? What Tess is saying is that Obama always voted no. The source I gave said he supported the one for his state. I'll come back when I have something, which I will try to get at a later time or else retract. Meanwhile, I'll just say the parts I agree with and make it easier on me. Obama should have voted for the Act, any version of it. That's one reason why I'm voting R.
Obama smiled smoothly and agreed, “I think you will,†adding, “I would have voted for the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in Illinois had it been worded the same as the federal bill. I think that’s the position the Democrats should take.â€There’s just one thing he forgot to mention: Obama had stopped his committee from adding the federal wording.With Obama no longer in the state Senate, the Born Alive legislation passed in 2005.
Obama opposed Born Alive in committee, but voted “present†— neither “yes†nor “no,†but merely “present†— on the state Senate floor, one of many “present†votes that Hillary Clinton has cited as evidence that Obama lacks leadership skills. Clinton voted for the federal Born Alive bill, putting her on record as more pro-life than Obama.
