I don’t even understand why someone would attempt an ‘abotrion’ where the baby isn’t killed first. But then I don’t understand them at all... thank G-d.
Evil sows the seeds of it’s own destruction. The NARAL and it’s associated fools aren’t breeding. In the long run, the demographic imperative has always been: breed or perish. They’ve chosen the latter.
John McCain just hit a grand slam
With McCain's announcement today that AK Gov. Sarah Palin will be his running mate, Barack Obama's abortion problem just got a whole lot bigger.
The McCain/Palin ticket offers a complete contrast to the Obama/Biden ticket on the pro-life issue.
Palin is a pro-lifer who not only talks the talk but walks the walk. Palin and her husband chose to deliver her fifth child, Trigg, earlier this year even though he was prenatally diagnosed with Down syndrome. Her doctor recommended abortion but Palin and her family refused. Indeed, 90% of babies with Down syndrome are aborted in the U.S. today.
(snip)
Meanwhile, Barack Obama, actively opposed legislation as IL state senator to protect little babies with Down syndrome who had survived their abortions but were being shelved in a hospital soiled utility room to die...
In fact, I presented my testimony 3 times before committees then-state Sen. Obama sat, describing my experience of holding a baby with Down syndrome for 45 minutes until he died who was an abortion survivor.
Obama was unmoved and aggressively opposed the IL Born Alive Infants Protect Act.
On the federal level NARAL expressed neutrality on identical legislation, which passed unanimously in the U.S. Senate and overwhelmingly in the U.S. House and was signed into law in 2002.
Obama actively opposed giving babies born alive after induced abortions, including those with Down syndrome, any kind of medical treatment because they might "burden" the mother's "original decision" (April 4, 2002, Illinois State Senate floor debate).
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/08/mccain_picks_pa.html
As I posted on a thread which discussed Nancy Pelosi's position on this matter:
Like King George and his excessive abuses of the colonists in 1776, Pelosi's overbearing, authoritarian holdup of "the People's" business in the halls of Congress may be about to end.
Singlehandedly, she has now begun a national debate on the subject of the rights of man (generic reference), and an examination of when those rights begin, that must lead thoughtful people to conclude, as did John F. Kennedy in his Inaugural Address:
"The world is different now . . . . And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forefathers fought are still at issue around the globe--the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God."
Life, and the liberty to enjoy rights, then, are entertwined. That is the underlying philosophy of the Declaration's claim to "unalienable" rights endowed by a Creator--not "chosen" by a woman by authority of some man-made judicial opinion. It is capsulized again by Jefferson:
"The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them."
With the scientific and technological knowledge available today, can there be serious doubt that what is conceived, if left alone and not "destroyed," is a little person who, under our Constitution, possesses rights and the liberty to "pursue happiness"?
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment
Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”