Op-Ed: Barack Obama and Live Birth Abortions

1 more article on this subject:

Jun 28, 2008 - The Family Research Council To Air New Ad Attacking Barack Obama On Abortion - 31 comments

Advertising

Obama's voting record in the Illinois State Senate is host to a fact little known to the public this Presidential Campaign Season. More over it reveals a disturbing thought process in America.

Live Birth Abortion was a practice in some Hospitals in America, which allows for an infant who survives an abortion procedure to die without medical treatment. In 2001 and 2002 bills were passed by the United States Congress to protect "infants born alive," amongst other patients rights. Thank God for small favors.

The purposes of H.R. 2175, the `Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2001' are:

(1) Ìto repudiate the flawed notion that a child's entitlement to the protections of the law is dependent upon whether that child's mother or others want him or her;

(2) Ìto repudiate the flawed notion that the right to an abortion means the right to a dead baby, regardless of where the killing takes place;

(3) Ìto affirm that every child who is born alive--whether as a result of induced abortion, natural labor, or caesarean section--bears an intrinsic dignity as a human being which is not dependent upon the desires, interests, or convenience of any other person, and is entitled to receive the full protections of the law; and

(4) Ìto establish firmly that, for purposes of Federal law, the term `person' includes an infant who is completely expelled or extracted from his or her mother and who is alive, regardless of whether or not the baby's development is believed to be, or is in fact, sufficient to permit long-term survival, and regardless of whether the baby survived an abortion.

Jill Staneck a Registered Nurse spoke out about the procedure at a hospital where she worked.

... In this particular abortion procedure doctors do not attempt to kill the baby in the uterus. The goal is simply to prematurely deliver a baby who dies during the birth process or soon afterward.

To commit induced labor abortion, a doctor or resident inserts a medication into the mother’s birth canal close to the cervix. The cervix is the opening at the bottom of the uterus that normally stays closed until a mother is about 40 weeks pregnant and ready to deliver. This medication irritates the cervix and stimulates it to open early. When this occurs, the small second or third trimester pre-term, fully formed baby falls out of the uterus, sometimes alive. By law, if an aborted baby is born alive, both birth and death certificates must be issued. Ironically, at Christ Hospital the cause of death often listed for live aborted babies is "extreme prematurity," an acknowledgement by doctors that they have caused this death.

It is not uncommon for a live aborted baby to linger for an hour or two or even longer. At Christ Hospital one of these babies lived for almost an entire eight-hour shift...

In the event that an aborted baby is born alive, she or he receives "comfort care," defined as keeping the baby warm in a blanket until s/he dies. Parents may hold the baby if they wish. If the parents do not want to hold their dying aborted baby, a staff member cares for the baby until s/he dies. If staff did does not have the time or desire to hold the baby, s/he is taken to Christ Hospital’s new Comfort Room, which is complete with a First Foto machine if parents want professional pictures of their aborted baby, baptismal supplies, gowns, and certificates, foot printing equipment and baby bracelets for mementos, and a rocking chair. Before the Comfort Room was established, babies were taken to the Soiled Utility Room to die.

The problem is that before the unanimous votes to pass these bills the option to go through with this procedure was available and practiced. The bills would put restrictions on the procedure which is a specific type of abortion that fetus sometimes survives. It would also require another doctor to be present to treat the resulting child if the fetus were to survive the abortion. The bills pushed through the Illinois legislature in 2001, Obama voted Present, and in 2002, Obama voted no.
The Bills introduced in Illinois in 2001 were:

Senate Bill 1093 which requires a separate physician, who is not involved in an abortion, to be present in the event that an abortion might result in a live birth, for that doctor to make an independent evaluation of the viability of the infant and to provide medical care if required.

Senate Bill 1094 creates a cause of action in the event an induced labor abortion results in a live birth and the doctor or health care provider harms or neglects the infant or fails to provide proper medical care to the child after its birth.

Senate Bill 1095 defines a "born-alive infant" to include every infant member of the homo sapiens species who is born alive at any stage of his/her development.

Obama was called out for his vote and his response was:

"It would essentially bar abortions because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this was a child then this would be an anti-abortion statute," Obama said in the Senate's debate in March 2001.

During his run for Federal Congress he expressed support for the federal bill which put in protections for abortion rights.

So apparently this was all about the rights of a mother to seek an abortion and he had problems with naming an infant born and completely outside of the mother a child. So because he played semantics in such a manner which is obviously supported by many pro-abortion groups we as Americans needed to waste time and money to redefine what a child is even though it has been established time and time again that a legal child is not a fetus in the womb but an infant who is completely extracted from the mother. We have to further degrade ourselves as human beings and legislate what is common sense, if a person is alive you give them treatment. Under the previous laws the reason live birth abortion was allowed to happen was that the procedure was supposed to result in the death of the baby, and the mother did not want the child. I am sorry but I fail to see how letting a live child die in a hospital without care is different from a mother giving birth then drowning the child in the bath tub because she did not want it.

The fact that abortionists thought that infanticide was a legal right shows to me they are completely off base. Live Birth Abortion was legal infanticide, that is all.

Honestly I don't know what is worse, ripping a child apart, sucking out its brains, or delivering it prematurely and letting it slowly suffocate as it struggles to breathe. As a woman I try to be understanding of those who seek abortion, especially mothers who have children and are in danger of death. Honestly I would rather if they do give birth prematurely, but to then set the baby aside and let it die? At least knowing that it is illegal to allow the baby to go with only comfort care and now must be treated is a blessing. If you think about it, this procedure is less invasive on the mother and the child, no ripping, no tearing, nothing more than a regular birth of a premature child. Now I am wondering why we still rip babies out body part by body part, why we stick scissors in their head and suck out their brains, or why we euthanize them while still in the womb. Why not deliver prematurely and then give custody to the state? It seems more humane, then again the cost of such a policy would be atrocious.

If you think, really think, about Abortions in America you start to wonder how much if it is a designed for population control, class control, and genetic control through inadvertent sterilization.

One must then further consider if it is right to keep alive babies born with defects that are life long debilitating such as Downs Syndrome and Spinabifida? I know rather deep questions, but if we continue in the circular arguments about religion vs. choice the real issues will keep themselves hidden under the voices of people who speak only to hear themselves and have no intention of solving problems. We need to define as a society where we want to go, forward, backward, or to the side.

Email this article

Add a Comment

Site Links

Corporate

Help & Support

News Links