Transcript of Obama's verbal opposition to Born Alive on the IL Senate floor

IL State Senate Transcript March 30, 2001, pages 84-90 ^

[cpforlife.org]

P>

This was on Jill Stanek’s website so she deserves all the credit. There is a great deal of transcripts there at that link below. I don't know if any other pages illustrate Obama inhumane positions.

http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/02/links_to_barack.html

It's in PDF and I cannot get the text to copy to paste the highlights. I'll try again. Obama starts his madness on page 84.

[cpforlife.org]

Pro-Life PING

Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.

[cpforlife.org]

PING

[cpforlife.org]

Again to clarify:

Here is the link directly to the transcript:
http://www.ilga.gov/senate/transcripts/strans92/ST033001.pdf

And here is the Jill Stanek link I originally found it on with Barry’s whole history on this and lots more IL gov. documents.
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/02/links_to_barack.html

[goldstategop]

He was so extreme he opposed saving even living infants! He did not think they nor the unborn were deserving of the right to life that the Constitution grants citizens of the United States. Obama openly endorsed infanticide! And just last week at Saddleback Civil Forum in California, when asked when life begins, answered flippantly, the question was above his pay grade! On the most central question surrounding human existence, he insulted his audience with a non-answer. Do we really want a person with that kind of character and manifest lack of respect for the American people to be their President? I think we all know the answer to that question.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[cpforlife.org]

FYI- This PDF document's security settings are set so that the text or pages cannot be copied. So I cannot copy and past to a post here. I type with my 2 index fingers, so if a Freeper wants to transcribe please have at it.

[Southack]

SENATOR OBAMA:

    This bill was fairly  extensively  debated  in  the  Judiciary

Committee,  and  so  I won’t belabor the issue.  I do want to just

make sure that everybody in the Senate knows  what  this  bill  is

about, as I understand it.  Senator O’Malley, the testimony during

the  committee  indicated  that  one of the key concerns was ­­ is

that there was a method of abortion, an  induced  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 that they were not

being properly cared for during that brief  period  of  time  that

they  were  still  living.   Is that correct?  Is that an accurate

sort of description of one of the key concerns in the bill?

PRESIDING OFFICER:  (SENATOR KARPIEL)

    Senator O’Malley.

SENATOR O’MALLEY:

    Senator Obama, it is certainly a key concern that the  ­­  the

way  children  are  treated  following  their  birth  under  these

                                                                85

= Page 85 =

                        STATE OF ILLINOIS
                      92ND GENERAL ASSEMBLY
                         REGULAR SESSION
                        SENATE TRANSCRIPT

20th Legislative Day                                March 30, 2001

circumstances  has  been  reported  to be, without question, in my

opinion,  less  than  humane,  and  so  this  bill  suggests  that

appropriate steps be taken to treat that baby as a ­­ a citizen of

the United States and afforded all the rights and  protections  it

deserves under the Constitution of the United States.

PRESIDING OFFICER:  (SENATOR KARPIEL)

    Senator Obama.

SENATOR OBAMA:

    Well,  it turned out ­­ that during the testimony a  number of

members who are typically in favor of a woman’s right to choose an

abortion were actually sympathetic to some of  the  concerns  that

your  ­­  you  raised  and  that  were  raised by witnesses in the

testimony.  And there was some suggestion that we might be able to

craft something that might meet constitutional muster with respect

to caring for fetuses or  children  who  were  delivered  in  this

fashion.   Unfortunately, this bill goes a little bit further, and

so I just want to suggest, not that I think it’ll  make  too  much

difference  with respect to how we vote, that this is probably not

going to survive constitutional scrutiny.  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 nine­month­old ­­  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.  For  that

purpose, I think it would probably be found unconstitutional.  The

second  reason that it would probably be found unconstitutional is

that this essentially says that a doctor is  required  to  provide

                                                                86

= Page 86 =

                        STATE OF ILLINOIS
                      92ND GENERAL ASSEMBLY
                         REGULAR SESSION
                        SENATE TRANSCRIPT

20th Legislative Day                                March 30, 2001

treatment  to a previable child, or fetus, however way you want to

describe it.  Viability is the line that has  been  drawn  by  the

Supreme  Court  to  determine  whether  or  not an abortion can or

cannot take place.  And if we’re placing a burden  on  the  doctor

that says you have to keep alive even a previable child as long as

possible  and  give  them  as  much  medical attention as ­­ as is

necessary to try to keep that child  alive,  then  we’re  probably

crossing the line in terms of unconstitutionality.  Now, as I said

before,  this  probably  won’t  make any difference.  I recall the

last time we had a debate about abortion, we passed a bill out  of

here.  I  suggested to Members of the Judiciary  Committee that it

was unconstitutional and it would be struck down  by  the  Seventh

Circuit.  It was. I recognize this is a passionate issue, and so I

­­  I won’t, as I said, belabor the point.  I think it’s important

to recognize though that this is  an  area  where  potentially  we

might  have  compromised  and  ­­ and arrived at a bill that dealt

with the narrow concerns about how a ­­ a previable fetus or child

was treated by a hospital.  We decided  not  to  do  that.   We’re

going  much  further  than  that in this bill. As a consequence, I

think that we will probably end up in  court  once  again,  as  we

often  do,  on  this  issue.  And as a consequence, I’ll be voting

Present.

PRESIDING OFFICER:  (SENATOR KARPIEL)

    Further discussion?  If not, Senator O’Malley, to close.

SENATOR O’MALLEY:

    Thank you, Madam President and Ladies  and  Gentlemen  of  the

Senate.   The  one thing the previous speaker did say is that this

is a passionate  issue.   And  ­­  however,  I  don’t  think  it’s

challengeable  on  constitutional  grounds  in the manner that was

described.  This is essentially  very  simple.   The  Constitution

does not say that a child born must be viable in order to live and

be  accorded the rights of citizenship.  It simply says it must be

                                                                87

= Page 87 =

                        STATE OF ILLINOIS
                      92ND GENERAL ASSEMBLY
                         REGULAR SESSION
                        SENATE TRANSCRIPT

20th Legislative Day                                March 30, 2001

born.  And a child who survives birth is a U.S.  citizen,  and  we

need  to  do  everything we can here in the State of Illinois and,

frankly, in the other  forty­nine  states  and  in  the  halls  of

Washington,  D.C.,  to  make sure that we secure and protect those

rights.  So if this legislation is designed to  clarify,  resecure

and  reaffirm  the  rights  that  are  entitled to a child born in

America, so be it, and it is constitutional.  I  would  appreciate

your support.

[cpforlife.org]

Here's more:

Transcript of Obama’s verbal opposition to Born Alive on the IL Senate floor, April 4, 2002, pages 28-35
http://www.ilga.gov/senate/transcripts/strans92/ST040402.pdf

Again from the Stanek link above.

As I understand it. Barry is the only Senator of either party to speak against this legislation. Twice. The third year he was chairman and killed it in his committee.

[cpforlife.org]

Awesome! How’d you do that?

[Southack]

Went to Google. Typed convert pdf to text. Downloaded program. Ran it.

Done.

Always ask Google. Bumps up your online IQ!

[cpforlife.org]

Oh yes. In my rush I forgot about that. Can you do the rest to p 90 where he talks about the “burden”?

[Scotswife]

Now would be a ripe moment to contact Gianna Jessen and get her back out in the public eye.

[Lizavetta]

I'm pretty sure that when Michelle Obama told B. Hussein she was pregnant, both with the first child and the second, that he considered those fetuses his babies and looked on them as his children.

I'm pretty sure he didn't sit there in a conundrum scratching his head saying, "Well, I'm not sure...this is above my pay grade."

WHAT A FREAKING INDUSTRIAL-STRENGTH DOOFUS.

[Southack]

“Burden” comment is on Page 87, listed above in my post.

*now, go download your conversion tool! You know how!

[Dominnae]

He makes me ill. He seems pretty confident of his pay-grade here doesn’t he?

“fetus or child, as — as some might describe it..”
“child or fetus, however way you want to describe it..”

And he has two beautiful little girls.. would he ever refer to either of them as “it” or “however you want to describe it” .. ?

His scales are showing. Cold blooded, belly crawling, bottom feeding, glowing example of liberal slime.

Dear Lord.

I have both the urge to go take a shower, and hug my daughter repeatedly, and not necessarily in that order.

[Red Steel]

He was so extreme he opposed saving even living infants!

Obama has said he doesn't want to punish her with a baby.

[TigersEye]

That is great to know. I have long lamented the inability to copy and paste from pdfs.

[Shelayne]

Dear Lord in Heaven, please do NOT let this man get anywhere NEAR the White House!

This makes my skin crawl.

[Shelayne]

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. For that purpose, I think it would probably be found unconstitutional.

If this is a child?? Seriously, what else is "it"--a reptile?? Go home, Barry. Just. Go. Home.

[Son House]

Obama “if we’re placing a burden on the doctor that says you have to keep alive even a previable child”

State of Illinois
92nd General Assembly
Regular Session
Senate Transcript March 30, 2001

Page 87

http://www.ilga.gov/senate/transcripts/strans92/ST033001.pdf

And if we’re placing a burden on the doctor that says you have to keep alive even a previable child as long as possible and give them as much medical attention as — as is necessary to keep that child alive, then we’re probably crossing the lines in terms of unconstitutionality.

[Brouhaha]

“fetus or child, as — as some might describe it..”
“child or fetus, however way you want to describe it..”

Dominnae,

I couldn’t agree with you more. Pretty much anything I could say in response to this guy would get me investigated by the Secret Service so I’ll just keep it to my self.

I pray that this disgusting person is booted back to Chicago (or better yet, Indonesia) ASAP!

Revolting!

[MHGinTN]

If you haven’t seen this yet ... ker-ping

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

"and if this is a child"

The mainstream media is so incompetent. He went to Harvard Law. The next time this comes up someone HAS to ask him if learned what "habeas corpus" means in law school.

"Now, Senator Obama, really, why on earth from either a scientific perspective, theological perspective, or legal perspective, would anyone think it was 'above his pay grade' to figure out whether a breathing infant outside of the womb meets the conditions for being a child?"

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Senator Obama: "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."

"...And if we’re placing a burden on the doctor that says you have to keep alive even a previable child as long as possible and give them as much medical attention as — as is necessary to keep that child alive, then we’re probably crossing the lines in terms of unconstitutionality."

"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. For that purpose, I think it would probably be found unconstitutional."

[Sun]

Tell everybody you know bump.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Obama:"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. "

Obama is saying there is a problem granting a child "born alive" in a botched abortion the same rights to protection and medical care as a "nine-month-old" child. This has to be the most absurd and extreme abortionist argumentation ever. This goes WAY beyond Roe vs. Wade.

[Salvation]

[MHGinTN]

And O'Malley exposed the spurious effort by Obama to obfuscate the truth on personhood:

"The Constitution does not say that a child born must be viable in order to live and be accorded the rights of citizenship."

[Darren McCarty]

a nine­month­old ­­ child that was delivered to term.

I guess I wasn't alive for the first three months of my life according to Mr Obama. That's news to my family and doctors.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Ther error seems to be Obama thinking that the constitutional right to life of a child is contingent upon whether the mother itended the child to be born or aborted.
Once the child is “born alive” his or her status, rights, and humanity have nothing to do with whether the mother wanted the child aborted. For Obama to allude to the original decision or intent of the mother at that point is bizarre. It has nothing to do with whether a living child deserves rights and medical care. The abortion is over at that point and the child is no longer in the mother’s body.
He can’t argue that the mother has a right for the child to die by being denied food, water, and medical care at that point simply because she wanted an abortion which failed.

[MHGinTN]

“The error seems to be Obama thinking that the constitutional right to life of a child is contingent upon whether the mother itended the child to be born or aborted.” And that is why Obama is rightly accused of defending INFANTICIDE. The sick, constantly interrupting, rdue freak Alan Colmes tries to make it sound like pointing out Obama’s defense of denying these born alive children their Constitutional rights is accusing him of killing children himself. Well, the realty is Obam’s protection of this evil makes him complicit in it. HE IS GUILTY of protecting infanticide!

[cpforlife.org]

Please correct me if I’m wrong. If a baby survives an abortion and lives for a time, doesn’t the child get a Birth Certificate and a Death Certificate? I’m getting at personhood & human rights—of course.

I’m starting to think Obama really wants to select Peter Singer from Princeton as his VP. He’s probably Barry’s #1 hero.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Bookmarked. In case you missed it, Rush Limbaugh played part of this speech yesterday [and for those who don’t know, the Obama Campaign was forced to confess that Obama had lied].