http://www.thepeasantsrevolt.com/wp-content/themes/atahualpa3451/atahualpa345/images/favicon/thepeasantsrevolt.com/1884/icon/ico" /> 'fff-favicon.ico' ; fff-favicon.ico

Great Resources

Great News For Babies

By Sally Mulder
Americans are realizing it’s a “baby” not a “blob!

wdnpkj_6ieskizdyprsnzg.gif

While the two-percentage-point gap in current abortion views is not significant, it represents the third consecutive time Gallup has found more Americans taking the pro-life than pro-choice position on this measure since May 2009, suggesting a real change in public opinion. By contrast, in nearly all readings on this question since 1995, and each survey from 2003 to 2008, more Americans called themselves pro-choice than pro-life.

Gallup may not think this is significant, but I bet they would if the trend was pro-abortion.

Democrats’ self-identification with the pro-life position has moved in the other direction, declining from 37% in 2003/2004 to 31% in 2009/2010. Among independents who lean Democratic, there has been no movement in either direction.

Democrats pro -abortion stance is best summed up by President Obama, “I don’t want my daughters punished with a baby.”

Obama voted against the Illinois Born Alive Act 3 times! As Chairman of the Health and Human Services Committee, Obama also “killed” the bill – refusing to let a revised bill come to the floor for a vote.  Below are Obama’s reasons for supporting infanticide:

Here are the top 10 reasons Barack Obama has variously stated why he voted against Illinois’ Born Alive Infant Protection Act when state senator. h/t Illinois Review

10. Babies who survive their abortions are not protected by the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. Speaking against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act on the IL Senate floor on March 30, 2001, Obama, the sole verbal opponent to the bill stated: ” … I just want to suggest… that this is probably not going to survive constitutional scrutiny.”…

9. A ban to stop aborted babies from being shelved to die would be burdensome to their mothers. She alone should decide whether her baby lives or dies. Before voting “no” for a 2nd time in the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 5, 2002, Obama stated:

“What we are doing here is to create one more burden on women, and I can’t support that.”….

During a speech at Benedictine University in October 2004, Obama said, according to the Illinois Leader, that “the decision concerning a baby should be left to a woman, but that he does not see himself as supportive of abortion.”

8. Wanting to stop live aborted babies from being shelved to die was all about politics. During that same speech at Benedictine University, Obama said, according to the Illinois Leader, “the bill was unnecessary in Illinois and was introduced for political reasons.”

7. There was no proof. Also during the Benedictine University speech, Obama said, according to the Illinois Leader, that there was no documentation that hospitals were actually doing what was alleged in testimony presented before him in committee.”

6. Aborting babies alive and letting them die is a doctor’s prerogative. An Obama spokesman told the Chicago Tribune in August 2004 that Obama voted against Born Alive because it included provisions that “would have taken away from doctors their professional judgment when a fetus is viable.”

5. Anyway, doctors don’t do that. Obama told the Chicago Sun-Times in October 2004 he opposed Born Alive because “physicians are already required to use life-saving measures when fetuses are born alive during abortions.”

4. Aborting babies alive and letting them die is a religious issue. During theirU.S. Senate competition Alan Keyes famously said:

Christ would not stand idly by while an infant child in that situation died…. Christ would not vote for Barack Obama, because Barack Obama has voted to behave in a way that it is inconceivable for Christ to have behaved.

Obama has always mischaracterized Keyes’ rationale for condemning Obama by implying Keyes was simply making a statement against Obama’s pro-abortion position, which is untrue. Keyes pointedly stated he was condemning Obama for his support of infanticide.

Nevertheless, live birth abortion must be included in the list of procedures Obama condones. Obama responded first to Keyes by saying, as quoted in his July 10, 2006, USA Today op ed:

... [W]e live in a pluralistic society, and that I can’t impose my religious views on another.

3. Aborting babies alive and letting them die violates no universal principle. In the sameUSA Today piece, Obama said he reflected on that first answer, decided it was a “typically liberal response,” and revised it:

… But my opponent’s accusations nagged at me…. If I am opposed to abortion for religious reasons but seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.

2. Sinking Born Alive was simply about political oneupsmanship. Obama has this quote on his website:

Pam Sutherland, the president and CEO of the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, told ABC News. “We worked with him specifically on his strategy. The Republicans were in control of the Illinois Senate at the time. They loved to hold votes on ‘partial birth’ and ‘born alive’. They put these bills out all the time… because they wanted to pigeonhole Democrats….”

And the #1 reason Obama voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act was:

1. The IL Born Alive Infant Protection Act was a ploy to undercut Roe v. Wade.During a debate against Keyes in October 2004, Obama stated:

Now, the bill that was put forward was essentially a way of getting around Roe vs. Wade…. At the federal level, there was a similar bill that passed because it had an amendment saying this does not encroach on Roe vs. Wade. I would have voted for that bill.

This was an out-and-out lie. The definition of “born alive” in the federal and Illinois versions were identical. The only difference came in paragraph (c), which was originally identical in both versions but changed on the federal level.

Illinois’ paragraph (c): A live child born as a result of an abortion shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law.

Federal paragraph (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.

When the senator sponsoring the IL bill tried to amend IL’s paragraph (c),Amendment 1 below, to be the same as the federal paragraph (c), Barack Obama himself, as chairman of the committee hearing the bill, refused, and he then also killed the bill (click to enlarge).

I have to ask, how can Christians be Democrats?  I realize many Christians are Democrats, but can any Christian justify the Democratic party’s non-Biblical, evil, pro- abortion stance ?  I would like to hear any Christian give a Biblical, logical defense of the Democrat party.

Babies don’t want to be aborted!  Those babies have a tremendous, God-given drive to live as illustrated by the following news stories:

BABY MIRACULOUSLY SURVIVES ABORTION, EXPECTED TO LIVE NORMAL LIFE h/t Fox News

ITALY  INVESTIGATES  REPORT BABY LIVED THROUGH ABORTION h/t CNN


Advances in ultra-sounds are awakening Americans to the truth.

All age groups have become more attached to the pro-life label since 2005, with particularly large increases among young adults and those aged 50 to 64 years in the latest period between 2007/2008 and 2009/2010.

1afeg6lkseulijlnexdzia.jpg

This is good news!

Both genders have also become more likely to identify as pro-life, with the increase among women coming mainly since 2008, whereas the increase in men started after 2006.

Americans, particularly Christians, are bombarded daily with discouraging, negative news.  It’s refreshing to see something positive.


UPDATE: If anyone thinks I’m misrepresenting Obama’s votes , here’s evidence from Obama’s own presidential campaign staff, August 18, 2008, New York Sun:

“They have not been telling the truth,” Mr. Obama said. “And I hate to say that people are lying, but here’s a situation where folks are lying.”

He added that it was “ridiculous” to suggest he had ever supported withholding lifesaving treatment for an infant. “It defies common sense and it defies imagination, and for people to keep on pushing this is offensive,” he said in the CBN interview…. For once, I agree with Obama!  His position was everything he said, but he didn’t go far enough.  Obama’s position continues to be indefensible, immoral, and reprehensible – as Obama knows. (skat)

Indeed, Mr. Obama appeared to misstate his position in the CBN interview on Saturday when he said the federal version he supported “was not the bill that was presented at the state level.”

His campaign yesterday acknowledged that he had voted against an identical bill in the state Senate,

More: Obama Facing Attacks From All Sides Over Abortion h/t Jill Stanek

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Have something to add?

Loading Disqus Comments ...
Loading Facebook Comments ...

You must be logged in to post a comment.