Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”
Posted on 09/21/2008 10:18:37 AM PDT by wagglebee
WASHINGTON, D.C., September 18, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Although Chairman Barbara Boxer expressed frustration when the unborn's right to life emerged as a topic of discussion during a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee meeting, she herself repeatedly admitted that a pregnant woman is carrying a child, despite her reputation for being staunchly pro-abortion.
Her admission happened while the Senate panel was reviewing a bill involving the dollar value assessment the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) assigns to human life in environmental decisions. Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), an established pro-life advocate, wanted to amend the bill to include considerations for unborn life.
"My amendment directs EPA to also establish and properly consider the statistical value of the conceived, unborn life," said Sen. Inhofe. "Given this Committee's recent focus on children's health it seems only consistent that we would want EPA to also properly value the life of the least protected class - the unborn children."
Sen. Boxer became clearly vexed at the mention of unborn life, saying, "Even the Bush administration has never brought the question of when life begins to an environmental regulation. It was my understanding that you were not going to do this, and now you're doing it."
While Inhofe's amendment was ultimately rejected, Boxer herself introduced an amendment stressing that the valuations should cover pregnant women, whom twice she characterized as carrying unborn children.
At one point during the meeting, Boxer said, in reference to pregnant women, "You can talk about it any way you want, but she's carrying a child." A second time she said, "I would just like to state the obvious. When a woman is pregnant, and I was, you're carrying a child and if you protect the pregnant woman, you're protecting that whole entire pregnancy."
Boxer's comments recognizing the presence of a child and not a mere fetus in the mother's womb stand in marked contrast to earlier discussions in which she vehemently refused to acknowledge the personhood of a preborn baby.
In 1999, while the Senate was debating the Partial Birth Abortion Ban, Sen. Rick Santorum questioned Boxer as to when a child assumes e the Constitutional right to life. Boxer refused to answer, despite Santorum posing the question about a dozen consecutive times. (see http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/notansweringboxersantorum.h... for a transcript of the exchange)
The left KNOWS that a pregnant woman is carrying a child, it's just that murdering the child doesn't bother the,
So she admitted that abortion is murder.
Nice.
Pro-Life Ping
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
So a baby is only a baby when it suits Boxer’s purposes....
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment
Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”
Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”
Obama Doesn’t Want His Daughters Punished with a Baby
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNzmly28Bmg
CNN on Obama’s Infant Born Alive Act Rejection
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPZCXcTwZPY
Jill Stanek on Obama and Born Alive Infant Protection Act (MUST SEE)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIdbYjmbFzo
Obama Cover-up Revealed On Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Bill
http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/ObamaCoverup.html
Explosive Audio Found Obama arguing against BAIPA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypDwNpgIUQc
Babies left to die!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIdbYjmbFzo
Truly stunning to watch.
When this whole thing started, they knew that most people would never accept any form of abortion if it was seen as murder. So in the beginning, they framed it a anything but (a “fetus”, “zygote”, etc). Now that the culture has come along over the years , with greater acceptance of the devaluation of human life (refusal of treatment to people in comas, greater acceptance of “right to die” of the elderly-whether some of them want the “right” or not-etc), it is becoming acceptable to admit that a pregnant woman is actually carrying a human baby, but it’s still OK to kill the baby.
The only people it’s still unacceptable to kill are convicted murderers who get the death penalty-the only non-innocent life.
VS pregnant guys?
It’s like she said that brick houses are made of bricks.
Do you know where to find any of the Obama video campaign clips where he slips into ebonics or his “inner city” accent? I had a couple marked as favorites, and now cannot find them.
mrsmel: “...it is becoming acceptable to admit that a pregnant woman is actually carrying a human baby, but it’s still OK to kill the baby.”
Agreed. Thirty years ago, we didn’t have as much information about what is going on in the womb. At that time, I think there was a degree of legitimate doubt about when life began. Abortion was easier if you thought it was nothing more than a clump of cells.
Now we have no doubt that a new life starts at conception, and the “clump of cells” becomes a small baby very quickly after that. It may not be able to survive without mom early on, but it’s clearly a human being.
Despite the scientific evidence, people should take a closer look at the morality. I think they’d find that many abortions are another immoral (evil) decision in a long chain of bad choices. Many of these women who get abortions are pregnant because they didn’t follow God’s guidance in the first place (and they would no doubt scream at me for telling them to restrict their sexual “freedom”). It’s no small surprise to me that they culminate a bunch of bad decisions with another bad decision, abortion.
But it doesn’t have to be this way. Every one of us has the freedom to choose to do right, to turn from sin and set things right. No baby needs or should be aborted simply because mom made a serious mistake.
BTW, I really don’t think it’s possible to argue against abortion without resorting to the morality. That is part of the reason why some people accept abortion. Yeah, they know it’s murder, but what’s the harm? The unborn aren’t contributing to society, it’s inconvenient for mommy, etc. The same attitude applies to the elderly. If you argue against euthanasia or abortion on purely scientific terms, you’ll lose. Without God there’s no evil that man won’t do. BET ON IT!
You’re right-we have become a culture that devalues life, period-I don’t think that the left would even care about the death penalty other than using it as a way to score political points, and the marxists amongst us using the useful idiots on the left to protest it as another means of destroying our culture. They have no principles, only an agenda, and they are well on the way to implementing it.
When a woman has a miscarriage has anyone heard you lost the fetus or you lost the baby?
See www.thequietconservative.com Accomplices and Heretics part 1 and 2.
The point is that the left cannot admit the unborn are separate people. If they do the money dries up and sex no longer is consequence free.
Neither result is one they can tolerate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.