Posted on 07/02/2008 4:35:45 PM PDT by wagglebee
On June 25, CNN's Wolf Blitzer asked conservative commentator Bill Bennett what question he would ask Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama if he could.
Bennett said he would ask Obama:
Why are you to the left of NARAL, Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein when it comes to abortion? Are you really there? ... I got to question the guy's moral judgment who doesn't see a problem with killing a baby after it's been born. … What is the answer to that question?
Bennett was speaking about Obama's opposition to Illinois' Born Alive Infants Protection Act as state senator. This legislation declared all live babies legal persons, which would guarantee them the right to appropriate medical care, even if abortion survivors.
(To which Obama defender Donna Brazile responded, "Bill, you want to have a conversation about narrow issues … but the American people want to talk about gas prices. …")
Over the years, Obama or his surrogates have mischaracterized Illinois' Born Alive Infants Protection Act and his reasons for opposing it at least 10 different ways.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
It was most illuminating.
Yes, Obama is a Sorcerer who is twisting what is righteous.
The Man of Lies.
Some might play devil’s advocate. The lunacy unleashed by an Obama adminstration would recharge and reenergize the conservative movement probably more than would a McCain presidency. But that doesn’t offer a lot of consolation for Americans for the next four years. If he wins, it’s a huge disaster. Except for Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, and Sean Hannity.
In my place of business I see a lot of people who are Obamabots. Several days ago I saw a tee-shirt captioned “Obama - Laying the Foundation of a New World.”
I thought to myself that they had omitted one word - “Brave.”
Dystopia is upon us. By the way, great tagline! It ranks right up there with Mark Twain’s “Never try to teach a pig to sing.....”
The executioner doesn't have to look the doomed in the face.....
Society in general is blind to (or may even be happy about) the occult aspect of this candidacy, but its love affair with the Culture of Death cannot stay hidden for long.
If slavery is right then nothing is wrong—Abe Lincoln
If partial birth abortion is right then nothing is wrong—nikos1121
Good idea!
This was his quote when asked about animal rights:
Obama responded that he cares about animal rights very much, “not only because I have a 9-year-old and 6-year-old who want a dog.” He said he sponsored a bill to prevent horse slaughter in the Illinois state Senate and has been repeatedly endorsed by the Humane Society.
“I think how we treat our animals reflects how we treat each other,” he said. “And it’s very important that we have a president who is mindful of the cruelty that is perpetrated on animals.”
however....not babies.
Sadly, Deut28, I agree. The militant ones have wicked, hard hearts. They are just blinded by a white-hot hate.
However, ex-abortionist Dr. Bernard Nathanson became pro-life through the new technology of ultrasound. His total life transformation of finding God came later. We just have to pray for those abortionists. Some do come around but obviously not enough of them.
Abortion’s/Planned Parenthood’s days ARE numbered with the return of Jesus.
Ah yes, the faith that the Lord will set all things right.
I believe it, but do wish He was more accomodating of my timeline!
*note* above is sarcasm
“I’ve often wondered that the infant needs to be turned into a breech position prior to this procedure.”
There is no medical reason for it.
In fact - it places additional stress on the mother’s body, and is a painful maneuver.
Abortionists invented this maneuver to skirt around the law.
Too many babies were surviving, and they didn’t want to be arrested for murdering live babies.
So...they turn the baby, and declare the child is not “born” because the head is still inside.
They make sure the child is dead before the head is delivered.
Therefore, it isn’t murder
“Also, how do you, the MD, kill an infant who has survived an abortion?”
Look what happens with preemies who are wanted.
Medical staff is ready, waiting, to assist the child.
The baby is given medicine to stimulate the lungs.He/She is placed in an incubator that is temperature controlled. Baby is given oxygen.Vitals are monitored.
A sterile environment is given to protect the baby from infection.
None of this is done for the survivor of abortion.
The baby is left alone on a table to die a slow and painful death.
No assistance with breathing - no warmth - no pain medicine.
Nothing.
In some cases (probably more often than we realize) the baby is “helped along”.
This is what Barak Obama stands for.Baby torture. Baby murder.Infanticide.
(I know I’m being redundant - just trying to help out those search engines)
“It’s despicable that so many—too many- Catholics and Protestants professing to believe in Christ Jesus vote for these ghoulish democrat bastards like Boxer, clinton, Dodd, Kennedy, Harkin, Murray, etc.”
I can only confirm what I’ve witnessed growing up as a catholic.
My home diocese is liberal - very liberal bishop who sometimes borders on outright rebellion.
I never heard about abortion at church growing up, and that is still the case.
It is different in the neighboring dioceses. Their bishops are more orthodox, and it shows with their priests.
They often will preach about abortion, and will pray for the unborn. (We have switched to a neighboring diocese)
There is also a weird cultural thing with many catholics.
They developed an affinity for the democrat party decades ago - especially the irish catholic immigrants who were helped by the democrats in finding work.
JFK solidified this notion with many of them that the democrat party was the catholic party.
It is common to visit the home of an older catholic, and you will see a picture of JFK on the wall alongside a picture of the pope.
I cannot for the life of me figure out why these people are so nonchalant about abortion.
They excuse themselves by claiming they don’t want to be “narrow” or “one issue” voters. They care for the poor - they hate war (blah blah blah)
Sadly - it seems to be VERY EASY for many people to simply not care about the pain and suffering innocent babies are forced to endure.
I have close family members - faithful practicing christians - who voted for Spitzer because they believed the lie that he would reform corruption in NY.
They didn’t want to be “one issue” voters and consider his stance on abortion.
Surprise surprise - one of the most ardent, extreme pro-choice politician turned out to be more corrupt than the people he prosecuted.
It will happen time after time.
Politicans who do not care about babies, are going to disappoint everyone on other moral issues as well.
No that’s NOT what happens.
n my training at Cook Co HOspital, we had several infants born, in the early second trimester of extremely low body wt. who were, at the time, way to small to transfer to the neonatal unit. They were left on a warm bed, no O2. And yes they would die. Occasionally, after several minute, some would still be alive and we’d then transfer them to the neonatal ward where they would receive intensive care, essentially living in an incubator for the next 20 weeks.
In an almost fully termed infant who is aborted, they will survive with minimal support assuming thaT THEY’re not placed in a cold place and left there for hours.
I’m asking Obama Camp to explain to me, how is a baby born almost to term, who was an attempted but failed abortion, killed? At what point do the MDS and nurses standing around say, “hey! this one is still alive...What do we do?
“n my training at Cook Co HOspital, we had several infants born, in the early second trimester of extremely low body wt. who were, at the time, way to small to transfer to the neonatal unit.”
I am making the assumption that most of the survivors are genuine preemies.
I think it was in the past month I read that most of these “survivors” are undergoing induced labor on premature infants. I’m not sure if the abortionists are trying to stop their hearts in the womb, or kill them using some other method, but they survive and then are left to die.
Will try to remember where I read that (sleep deprived - brain not working)
I am also assuming that for full term infants - that is when they are resorting to dilation and extraction.
Essentially - making damn sure the baby is dead before he/she emerges.
“I’m asking Obama Camp to explain to me, how is a baby born almost to term, who was an attempted but failed abortion, killed? At what point do the MDS and nurses standing around say, “hey! this one is still alive...What do we do?”
Well, sometimes, this is what they do...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2035631/posts
Yes, that's what usually happens. A baby farther along than expected is aborted using one of the techniques you mentioned and lives.
I am not an ultra fanatic with regarding my Pro Life beliefs, i.e. I would not kill or bomb an abortion clinic, or defend the person who does this. I don't shout down my colleagues who perform abortions, but they are not my friends.
But something bothers me about telling a young would be mother to adopt out her baby without her getting something in return. I don't know if this is against the law, I'm sure it's not, but I am for young mothers who opt to adopt getting paid, and paid well if they put the child up for adoption.
Why shouldn't a 16 year old girl, who chooses to have the baby, but who is clearly unable to care for it, not have the option of adopting the child out to another loving couple who is WILLING TO PAY THE WOMAN FOR ENDURING HER 9 MONTH PREGNANCY. I MEAN CARRYING A CHILD WOULD BE SIMILAR TO HER BEING EMPLOYED.
After birth the mother gives up the child, receives $100,000, and everyone is happy. The young girl learns from the experience and has the option of doing something positive with her life.
Why would anyone wish to give up their baby otherwise, unless child rearing appalls her?
It bothers me that Obama has more concern for animal rights, than human rights. If this guy is elected, Heaven help us. If late term abortion on demand is NOT wrong...THEN NOTHING IN THIS WORLD IS WRONG.
most girls who choose adoption do get their medical bills paid for. Sometimes they are provided housing and other necessities during their pregnancy (for ex...orgs like birthright offer housing)
Private agreements between birth mothers and adoptive families may cover a variety of expenses.
Perhaps some adoptive families do offer donations to the mother - I don’t know much about that.
The danger I see with your proposal is the obvious temptation to use childbirth as a moneymaking proposition.
You don’t think some girls would consider purposefully getting pregnant for 100 grand?
In the end it isn’t about money - it’s about recognizing who is a person, and who is “not”.
It comes down to issues of morals and human rights.
We’ve convinced young people these babies are not people to make it easier for them to take this “easy out”.
Only it ain’t easy.
Abortion is a terrible thing to suffer through - I saw it with many of my friends and some family members.
The clinic workers tickle their ears with phrases that appeal to their feelings of panic “clump of cells”, “not a baby yet,” “no one has to know”, “get your life back.”
And then afterward, when the girl takes time to learn the truth - that her baby was more than a clump of cells - well, she cannot undo what’s been done.
The truth is that there is no easy way out of a pregnancy.
Live birth, miscarriage, abortion - none of it is “easy”.
But we can do our best to promote the protection of innocent life and raise awareness about the scientific fact that life begins at conception.
God Bless!
The truth is that there is no easy way out of a pregnancy.
Live birth, miscarriage, abortion - none of it is “easy”.
Money, unfortunately as bad as it’s sounds, is ten times better than having the abortion...
agreed, but I’m envisioning young teens who are already tempted to drop out of high school -looking at that 100k payoff and saying “I could make a career out of this.”
Heck - they don’t have to be teens - any female would be tempted by that price tag.
100K for 9 months and some stretch marks?
Especially in this economy?
It reminds me of a story I recently read about military wives resorting to becoming surrogates more often now.
I guess that’s a whole ‘nother discussion...wombs for rent, or wombs as a career choice.
supply and demand, but i guarantee you the number of abortions would go down!!! In time, the price would go down, but I think you’re asking much for a young mother to give up her child. At least she can say to her daughter if they ever meet, I did this because I was poor and the last thing I wanted to do was an abortion.
I’m sorry, this country is FULL of unwed, uneducated young mother’s whose only success in life is having a baby, which her mother or grand mother raise.
You know that stats. Her child will be on drugs, crime, uneducated, no father figure etc etc.
I know the Clintons love the idea of a disintegrating family...but at least an adopted child would be raised in a loving home.....
“but I think you’re asking much for a young mother to give up her child. “
I’m not asking her to give up her child.
I’m asking her not to kill the child.
” At least she can say to her daughter if they ever meet, I did this because I was poor and the last thing I wanted to do was an abortion.”
Well...she can still say that with adoption.
On the other hand, what you are suggesting is that she could later meet the child and say “I’m sorry - I saw an economic opportunity, and chose to get pregnant for the money. I had you so I could get a 100K”
“I’m sorry, this country is FULL of unwed, uneducated young mother’s whose only success in life is having a baby, which her mother or grand mother raise.”
yes - I know that.
I’m just not comfortable with the idea that it would be good to economically exploit them for the use of their wombs.
Some might put this in the “human trafficking” category.
No, I’m not saying that all. I’m saying realistically, how can a 16 yr old 20 year old single parent work and raise a child. Abortion is the easy way, that planned parenthood prescribes. Adopting the child to a loving family who is willing to reimburse the mother for carrying the child, and agreeing to give it up. For giving the GIFT of life...WHY SHOULD ANYONE FEEL EMBARRASSED ABOUT THAT?
I have friends who have adopted Phillipino and Russian babies. They’ve paid tens of thousands to agencies....The mothers in those instances get zero..
You would see a precipitous drop in abortions and young single mothers if there was a adoption service that realistically reimbursed the mother for her gift.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.