[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

America has been infiltrated and occupied Netanyahu 1980

Senior Trump Official Declares War On Far-Left NGOs Sowing Chaos Nationwide

White House Plans Security Boost On Civil Terrorism Fears

Visualizing The Number Of Farms In Each US State

Let her cry

The Secret Version of the Bible You’re Never Taught - Secret History

Rocker defames Charlie Kirk threatens free speech

Paramount Has a $1.5 Billion South Park Problem

European Warmongers Angry That Trump Did Not Buy Into the ‘Drone Attack in Poland’

Grassley Unveils Declassified Documents From FBI's Alleged 'Political Hit Job' On Trump

2 In 5 Young Adults Are Taking On Debt For Social Image, To Impress Peers, Study Finds

Visualizing Global Gold Production By Region

RFK Jr. About to DROP the Tylenol–Autism BOMBSHELL & Trump tweets cryptic vaccine message

Elon Musk Delivers Stunning Remarks At Historic UK March

Something BIG is happening (One Assassination Changed Everything)

The Truth About This Piece Of Sh*t

Breaking: 18,000 Epstein emails just dropped.

Memphis: FOUR CHILDREN shot inside a home (National Guard Inbound)

Elon Musk gives CHILLING WARNING after Charlie Kirk's DEATH...

ActBlue Lawyers Subpoenaed As House GOP Investigation Into Donor Fraud Intensifies

Cash Jordan: Gangs EMPTY Chicago Plaza... as Mayor's "LET THEM LOOT" Plan IMPLODES

Trump to send troops to Memphis

Who really commands China’s military? (Xi Jinping on his way out)

Ghee: Is It Better Than Butter?

What Is Butyric Acid? 6 Benefits (Dr Horse says eat butter, not margarine!)

Illegal Alien Released by Biden Admin Beheads Motel Manager In Dallas,

Israel Wants to Unite Itself by Breaking the World -

Leavitt Castigates Journalists To Their Faces Over Lack Of Iryna Zarutska Killing Coverage

Aussie Students Spend The Most Time In School, Polish Kids The Least

Tyler Robinson, 22, Named As Suspect In Charlie Kirk Assassination


(s)Elections
See other (s)Elections Articles

Title: Obama's Abortion Extremism
Source: Washington Post
URL Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy ... 008/04/01/AR2008040102197.html
Published: Apr 11, 2008
Author: Michael Gerson
Post Date: 2008-04-11 12:44:31 by Horse
Keywords: None
Views: 642
Comments: 37

Sen. Robert P. Casey Jr.'s endorsement of Barack Obama last week -- "I believe in this guy like I've never believed in a candidate in my life" -- recalled another dramatic moment in Democratic politics. In the summer of 1992, as Bill Clinton solidified his control over the Democratic Party, Robert P. Casey Sr., the senator's father, was banned from speaking to the Democratic convention for the heresy of being pro-life.

The elder Casey (now deceased) was then the governor of Pennsylvania -- one of the most prominent elected Democrats in the country. He was an economic progressive in the Roosevelt tradition. But his Irish Catholic conscience led him to oppose abortion. So the Clintons chose to humiliate him. It was a sign and a warning of much mean-spirited pettiness to come.

The younger Casey, no doubt, is a sincere fan of Obama. He also must have found it satisfying to help along the cycle of political justice.

But by Casey's father's standard of social justice for the unborn, Obama is badly lacking.

Obama has not made abortion rights the shouted refrain of his campaign, as other Democrats have done. He seems to realize that pro-choice enthusiasm is inconsistent with a reputation for post-partisanship.

But Obama's record on abortion is extreme. He opposed the ban on partial-birth abortion -- a practice a fellow Democrat, the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, once called "too close to infanticide." Obama strongly criticized the Supreme Court decision upholding the partial-birth ban. In the Illinois state Senate, he opposed a bill similar to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which prevents the killing of infants mistakenly left alive by abortion. And now Obama has oddly claimed that he would not want his daughters to be "punished with a baby" because of a crisis pregnancy -- hardly a welcoming attitude toward new life.

For decades, most Democrats and many Republicans have hoped the political debate on abortion would simply go away. But it is the issue that does not die. Recent polls have shown that young people are more likely than their elders to support abortion restrictions. Few Americans oppose abortion under every circumstance, but a majority oppose most of the abortions that actually take place -- generally supporting the procedure only in the case of rape or incest, or to save the life of the mother.

Perhaps this is a revolt against a culture of disposability. Perhaps it reflects the continuing revolution of ultrasound technology -- what might be called the "Juno" effect. In the delightful movie by that name, the protagonist, a pregnant teen seeking an abortion, is confronted by a classmate who informs her that the unborn child already has fingernails -- which causes second thoughts. A worthless part of its mother's body -- a clump of protoplasmic rubbish -- doesn't have fingernails.

Abortion is an unavoidable moral issue. It also has broader political significance. Democrats of a past generation -- the generation of Hubert Humphrey and Martin Luther King Jr. -- spoke about building a beloved community that cared especially for the elderly, the weak, the disadvantaged and the young.

The advance of pro-choice policies imported a different ideology into the Democratic Party -- the absolute triumph of individualism. The rights and choices of adults have become paramount, even at the expense of other, voiceless members of the community.

These trends reached their logical culmination during a congressional debate on partial-birth abortion in 1999. When Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer was pressed to affirm that she opposed the medical killing of children after birth, she refused to commit, saying that children deserve legal protection only "when you bring your baby home." It was unclear whether this included the car trip.

Having endorsed partial-birth abortion, Obama has little room to maneuver on the broader issue. But he does have some. He could take the wise counsel of evangelical Democrats such as Amy Sullivan and come out strongly for policies that would reduce the number of abortions -- support for pregnant women, abstinence education, the responsible promotion of birth control. An organization called Democrats for Life has proposed the creation of a "95-10 Initiative" in which states and the federal government would work toward the reduction of abortion rates by 95 percent within 10 years. That would be a unifying national goal.

Such efforts will not please many pro-lifers, who are waiting on Obama to support any type of legal protection for the unborn. But a real effort to reduce the number of abortions would indicate that Obama's Democratic Party is moving beyond its humiliation of Gov. Casey. And maybe Sen. Robert P. Casey Jr., with his newfound leverage, could insist upon it.


Poster Comment:

Christine asked me to research my comment that Barack Obama twice voted to table a resolution that would have made it illegal to incinerate a baby that had survived a partial birth abortion. I found this by Michael Gerson. Gerson is not a conservative. He is a member of the CFR.

I have said before that I never vote for or against a candidate based on abortion. What I have said is the the Democratic nomination skews to the far left. They should eliminate caucuses and do 100% primaries to eliminate candidates who will bomb in 32 states when they hear ads informing them that candidate X wants to legalize incinerating babies.

People on 4um did not know his rather extreme views so I doubt the voters knew it when they voted for him.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 23.

#23. To: Horse, robin, Peppa (#0)

NARAL Statement: "NARAL Does Not Oppose Passage" of BAIPA. In a statement, NARAL said, "Consistent with our position last year, NARAL does not oppose passage of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. Last year's committee and floor debate served to clarify the bill's intent and assure us that it is not targeted at Roe v. Wade or a woman's right to choose." [NARAL release, 6/13/01]

Not even NARAL opposed the Federal bill.

THE FEDERAL BILL

thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:h.r.02175:

Born Alive Infant Protection Act full text
H.R. 2175
107th Congress, 2nd Session

Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)

--H.R.2175--

H.R.2175

One Hundred Seventh Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the twenty-third day of January, two thousand and two

An Act

To protect infants who are born alive.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002'.
SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF BORN-ALIVE INFANT.
(a) IN GENERAL- Chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`Sec. 8. `Person', `human being', `child', and `individual' as including born-alive infant
`(a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words `person', `human being', `child', and `individual', shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.
`(b) As used in this section, the term `born alive', with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.
`(c) 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.'.
(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:
`8. `Person', `human being', `child', and `individual' as including born-alive infant.'.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.

FEDERAL LAW CODIFIED

www.law.cornell.edu/uscod..._01_00000008----000-.html

1 USC Chap 1, Sec 8

TITLE 1 > CHAPTER 1 > § 8

§ 8. “Person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual” as including born-alive infant

(a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.

(b) As used in this section, the term “born alive”, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.

(c) 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.

nolu_chan  posted on  2008-04-11   22:21:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 23.

#24. To: nolu_chan (#23)

nolu,

I'm out of gas tonight, but it would be good to contrast the actions of Obama against the Act itself. First blush appears to be some political gamesmanship... surely this can be clarified somewhere.

~ nite.

Peppa  posted on  2008-04-11 22:26:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 23.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]