When a candidate for President of a major political party is so depraved that he supports infanticide, you know that we are a nation in moral and spiritual crisis.
You thought late term partial birth abortion was barbaric? How about the murder of babies who have actually been born?
Columnist Linda Chavez wrote a piece about how Obama’s support for infanticide will cost him amongst Catholics (even nominal Catholics). It should cost him the support of every human being who is capable of any compassion for human life.
Legislation to protect babies who survived premature inducement for the purpose of abortion (i.e., outside the mother’s body) began to form after Jill Stanek, a registered delivery-ward nurse in an Illinois hospital, testified that living babies had simply being allowed to die without any attempt to provide medical treatment. A federal law titled the Born Alive Infant Protection Act was signed into law by President Bush in 2002 after it passed by unanimous vote in the Senate.
NARAL Pro-Choice America issued a statement that it did not oppose passage of the law. Other abortion rights groups acknowledged that opposing it would be extreme.
But Barack Obama demonstrated just how radically committed he was to abortion. Even retroactive abortion. Even the killing by callous neglect of a little baby who had taken her first breaths of the very same air that you and I breathe. He voted against the Illinois state version of the law. When it went to the Health and Human Services Committee, which State Senator Obama chaired, he refused to ever allow it to come up for a vote. He shelved it from even getting a hearing, much the same way that slowly dying babies had been shelved in hospitals and abortion clinics. It would pass only after Obama left the state senate and his committee chairman’s gavel was passed to another senator.
Jill Stanek, the nurse who fought for the law in both Illinois and the nation’s capital, said of Obama:
We were in Springfield to lobby for passage of the state Born Alive Infant Protection Act, legislation that would require hospitals to care for infants who survive an abortion. Obama spoke against the legislation in 2001 and 2002 and single-handedly defeated it in committee in 2003.
My friend stood in Obama’s path and said, “Senator, we are going to pass Born Alive here in Illinois this year.”
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.”
There’s just one thing he forgot to mention: Obama had stopped his committee from adding the federal wording.
This is the very sort of slimeball, disingenuous, hypocritical tactic that I believe characterizes this man. Barack Obama, as a member of radical ACORN, registered voters and filed a lawsuit to prevent any attempt to prune voter rolls, and then cynically and hypocritically challenged every single voter signature in order to keep the popular incumbent off the ballot for the state senate.
Barack Obama is a man who is so callous that he repeatedly prevented a law that would have provided an innocent human baby, born in the midst of unimaginable cruelness, surviving outside of her mothers body, fighting for her life, a chance to live.
The Nazis coined a term, Lebensunwertes Leben, a life unworthy to be lived.
Jill Stanek gave this testimony to the Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee, of which Barack Obama was a present member, on March 27, 2001:
One night, a nursing co-worker was taking an aborted Down’s syndrome baby who was born alive to our Soiled Utility Room because his parents did not want to hold him, and she did not have time to hold him. I could not bear the thought of this suffering child dying alone in a Soiled Utility Room, so I cradled and rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived. He was 21 to 22 weeks old, weighed about ½ pound, and was about 10 inches long. He was too weak to move very much, expending any energy he had trying to breathe. Toward the end, he was so quiet that I couldn’t tell if he was still alive unless I held him up to the light to see if his heart was still beating through his chest wall. After he was pronounced dead, we folded his little arms across his chest, wrapped him in a tiny shroud, and carried him to the hospital morgue where all of our dead patients are taken.
She was forbidden from providing any lifesaving medical care. It tore at her conscience.
Barack Obama claims to be a Christian, a follower of Jesus Christ. When Jesus said, “Let the little children come to Me” (Luke 18:15), does Barack Obama believe that Jesus meant to perform retroactive abortions on them? Or did Jesus seek to love and bless these most innocent and precious members of the human race?
1 Timothy chapter four begins with these words: “Now the Holy Spirit tells us clearly that in the last times some will turn away from what we believe; they will follow lying spirits and teachings that come from demons. These teachers are hypocrites and liars. They pretend to be religious, but their consciences are dead.”
I can’t imagine anything more demonic than infanticide. And I can’t imagine any conscience being more dead than the one that supports infanticide.
There are tears in my eyes, because I can see that little baby slowly dying, his pitiful little gasps for air a silent testimony that the monstrous and immoral ideology of a life unworthy to be lived is still among us.
The following is an update (15 October 2008): Go to Factcheck.org article “Obama and Infanticide: the facts about Obama’s votes against “born alive” bills in Illinois.” There is a treasure trove of documentation which not only proves that Obama genuinely supported infanticide, but that he was completely disingenuous about his entire position. You cannot trust Barack Obama.
If you vote for this man, shame on you.
Tags: 1 Timothy 4:2, abortion, acorn, BAIPA, Barack Obama, Born Alive Infant Protection Act, Illinois, infanticide, Jill Stanek, NARAL, Nazis, senate
October 14, 2008 at 9:11 pm
In case you check these, I wanted to let you know I am following through on my word. This is very disturbing. One question: Not to be cynical, but where is the proof that the amendment to the state bill was actually language that would change it to the language of the federal version? A link that explains it would certainly suffice if you know. Thanks!
October 15, 2008 at 11:27 am
Brian,
Good to hear. And it isn’t cynical to ask good questions; it’s only cynical to not believe good answers to those questions.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obama_and_infanticide.html
“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. Both contained identical clauses saying that nothing in the bills could be construed to affect legal rights of an unborn fetus, according to an undisputed summary written immediately after the committee’s 2003 mark-up session.”
It also says this:
“NRLC posted documents – which are so far undisputed – showing that Amendment 001 was adopted in committee and added the following text: “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.” That wording matches exactly the comparable provision in the federal law.” And links to Amendment 001:
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=09300SB1082sam001&GA=93&SessionId=3&DocTypeId=SB&LegID=3910&DocNum=1082&GAID=3&Session=
This from another article I’ve got:
https://startthinkingright.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/jill-stanek-on-why-barack-obama-voted-for-infanticide/
At the very bottom of that article there is this quote, with a link, and a chart that documents the claim: “When the senator sponsoring the IL bill tried to amend IL’s paragraph (c), Amendment 1 below, to be the same as the federal paragraph (c), Barack Obama himself, as chairman of the committee hearing the bill, refused, and he then also killed the bill (click to enlarge).”
In other words, if Obama claims that he didn’t vote for the Illinois BAIPA bill because the language wasn’t “identical” to the federal version, he must deal with the fact that the language WASN’T “identical” ONLY because he refused to allow the change in language. He also wouldn’t allow it to come up for a vote while he was in the state senate.
An article that links to actual bill language is:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08081101.html
I think if you really look into this you will not only see Obama’s monstrous infanticide view, but also the incredibly disingenuous way he operates. He shows no integrity at all, deliberately misrepresenting and flat-out lying about the facts, his positions, and his reasons for his positions.
The Illinois bill passed overwhelmingly AFTER Obama left the state senate and a new committee chair allowed it to come up for a vote.
http://catholicexchange.com/2008/10/01/114036/
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=13617
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51121
http://geekonobama.blogtownhall.com/2008/08/11/obama_lies_about_the_baipa_bill_in_illinois.thtml