Obama approach defeating the bill from the direction of claiming that defining a 'pre-viable' fetus or child as a person would effectively end the legality of killing these persons. He directed his argument to misdirecting attention to the pre-born, and O'Malley redirects the focus to the already born to whom the bill was designed for protection.
Obama goes on to assert that the bill contains things which would cause it to not pass constitutional review, but the important thing to note in his words is the rhetorical effort to prevent personhood from being conveyed to these 'fetuses or children' --his words, so we know he is more than wiulling to defend the killing of ALIVE CHILDREN SO LONG AS THEY ARE IN A WOMB.
I now have the pdf transcript on my laptop as word doc so I could post the relevant passages if you wish?
Just got back to the PC and am catching up here.
Yes, thanks for posting that transcript.
Keep in mind Marvin the Transcript of Obama’s verbal opposition to Born Alive on the IL Senate floor, April 4, 2002, pages 28-35 is the one the new audio thats been around for the last day or so is from. http://www.ilga.gov/senate/transcripts/strans92/ST040402.pdf
I downloaded a free program to convert pdf to word but cannot get it to work. If you could post the April 4, 2002, pages 28-35 as well Id appreciate it. Hopefully more folks will read it?
RE: Obama’s effrort appears to clearly be aimed at preventing the born child from having personhood defining that survivor of the abortion attempt. Obama approach defeating the bill from the direction of claiming that defining a ‘pre-viable’ fetus or child as a person would effectively end the legality of killing these persons.
I think there actually might be some truth there that it could possibly ban certain abortions. My friend at the Holocaust Memorial has worked w several pro-Life attorneys over the years trying to get mills shut down and has mentioned something similar. I’ll look into it.
BlackElk any thoughts?