Transcript of Obama's verbal opposition to Born Alive on the IL Senate floor

IL State Senate Transcript March 30, 2001, pages 84-90 ^

[cpforlife.org]

P>

This was on Jill Stanek’s website so she deserves all the credit. There is a great deal of transcripts there at that link below. I don't know if any other pages illustrate Obama inhumane positions.

http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/02/links_to_barack.html

It's in PDF and I cannot get the text to copy to paste the highlights. I'll try again. Obama starts his madness on page 84.

[Brouhaha]

“fetus or child, as — as some might describe it..”
“child or fetus, however way you want to describe it..”

Dominnae,

I couldn’t agree with you more. Pretty much anything I could say in response to this guy would get me investigated by the Secret Service so I’ll just keep it to my self.

I pray that this disgusting person is booted back to Chicago (or better yet, Indonesia) ASAP!

Revolting!

[MHGinTN]

If you haven’t seen this yet ... ker-ping

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

"and if this is a child"

The mainstream media is so incompetent. He went to Harvard Law. The next time this comes up someone HAS to ask him if learned what "habeas corpus" means in law school.

"Now, Senator Obama, really, why on earth from either a scientific perspective, theological perspective, or legal perspective, would anyone think it was 'above his pay grade' to figure out whether a breathing infant outside of the womb meets the conditions for being a child?"

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Senator Obama: "As I understand it, this puts the burden on the attending physician who has determined, since they were performing this procedure, that, in fact, this is a nonviable fetus; that if that fetus, or child - however way you want to describe it - is now outside the mother's womb and the doctor continues to think that it's nonviable but there's, let's say, movement or some indication that, in fact, they're not just coming out limp and dead, that, in fact, they would then have to call a second physician to monitor and check off and make sure that this is not a live child that could be saved."

"...And if we’re placing a burden on the doctor that says you have to keep alive even a previable child as long as possible and give them as much medical attention as — as is necessary to keep that child alive, then we’re probably crossing the lines in terms of unconstitutionality."

"I mean, it ­­ it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute. For that purpose, I think it would probably be found unconstitutional."

[Sun]

Tell everybody you know bump.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Obama:"Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a -- a child, a nine-month-old -- child that was delivered to term. "

Obama is saying there is a problem granting a child "born alive" in a botched abortion the same rights to protection and medical care as a "nine-month-old" child. This has to be the most absurd and extreme abortionist argumentation ever. This goes WAY beyond Roe vs. Wade.

[Salvation]

[MHGinTN]

And O'Malley exposed the spurious effort by Obama to obfuscate the truth on personhood:

"The Constitution does not say that a child born must be viable in order to live and be accorded the rights of citizenship."

[Darren McCarty]

a nine­month­old ­­ child that was delivered to term.

I guess I wasn't alive for the first three months of my life according to Mr Obama. That's news to my family and doctors.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Ther error seems to be Obama thinking that the constitutional right to life of a child is contingent upon whether the mother itended the child to be born or aborted.
Once the child is “born alive” his or her status, rights, and humanity have nothing to do with whether the mother wanted the child aborted. For Obama to allude to the original decision or intent of the mother at that point is bizarre. It has nothing to do with whether a living child deserves rights and medical care. The abortion is over at that point and the child is no longer in the mother’s body.
He can’t argue that the mother has a right for the child to die by being denied food, water, and medical care at that point simply because she wanted an abortion which failed.

[MHGinTN]

“The error seems to be Obama thinking that the constitutional right to life of a child is contingent upon whether the mother itended the child to be born or aborted.” And that is why Obama is rightly accused of defending INFANTICIDE. The sick, constantly interrupting, rdue freak Alan Colmes tries to make it sound like pointing out Obama’s defense of denying these born alive children their Constitutional rights is accusing him of killing children himself. Well, the realty is Obam’s protection of this evil makes him complicit in it. HE IS GUILTY of protecting infanticide!

[cpforlife.org]

Please correct me if I’m wrong. If a baby survives an abortion and lives for a time, doesn’t the child get a Birth Certificate and a Death Certificate? I’m getting at personhood & human rights—of course.

I’m starting to think Obama really wants to select Peter Singer from Princeton as his VP. He’s probably Barry’s #1 hero.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Bookmarked. In case you missed it, Rush Limbaugh played part of this speech yesterday [and for those who don’t know, the Obama Campaign was forced to confess that Obama had lied].