Been away from posting for a while. Finishing up a recording project for my son, and holiday stuff. Can't help but wonder if the country is ready for Barack Obama.
This guy is articulate, good looking, smooth as glass. And he presses the right "religion" buttons to woo a new generation of evangelical voters. I had dinner with a young man who interned for Obama and was fairly sold on him.
Consider this quote from Obama's 'Call to Renewal' address:
...secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square. Frederick Douglas, Abraham Lincoln, Williams Jennings Bryant, Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King - indeed, the majority of great reformers in American history - were not only motivated by faith, but repeatedly used religious language to argue for their cause. So to say that men and women should not inject their "personal morality" into public policy debates is a practical absurdity. Our law is by definition a codification of morality, much of it grounded in the Judeo-Christian tradition.
Jim Dobson couldn't have said it better. And the mainstream media will undoubtedly broadcast every soundbite it can that paints Obama in the light of a moderate, rational and religious man.
Here's my problem and many have written on this subject.
Obama's positions on life issues are more extreme than any candidate I have ever seen.
Jill Stanek was fired from her position as a nurse at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Illinois for going public about the infanticide that was occurring there. Babies were being born alive and left to die in a linen room. Her World Net Daily column about Obama's positions ought to be broadcast far and wide. After blowing the whistle on infanticide, legislation was proposed nationwide to address the issue. Stanek writes:
Legislation was presented on the federal level and in various states called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. It stated all live-born babies were guaranteed the same constitutional right to equal protection, whether or not they were wanted.
BAIPA sailed through the U.S. Senate by unanimous vote. Even Sens. Clinton, Kennedy and Kerry agreed a mother's right to "choose" stopped at her baby's delivery.
The bill also passed overwhelmingly in the House. NARAL went neutral on it. Abortion enthusiasts publicly agreed that fighting BAIPA would appear extreme. President Bush signed BAIPA into law in 2002.
But in Illinois, the state version of BAIPA repeatedly failed, thanks in large part to then-state Sen. Barack Obama. It only passed in 2005, after Obama left.
Consider what is being said here. This is not about abortion. These were infants born alive. Nobody opposed this measure. Not even Ted Kennedy and NARAL. Yet Obama did. Though national measures had passed, Obama singlehandedly prevented passage in Illinois. Stanek continued:
I testified in 2001 and 2002 before a committee of which Obama was a member. Obama articulately worried that legislation protecting live aborted babies might infringe on women's rights or abortionists' rights. Obama's clinical discourse, his lack of mercy, shocked me.
I was naive back then. Obama voted against the measure, twice. It ultimately failed. In 2003, as chairman of the next Senate committee to which BAIPA was sent, Obama stopped it from even getting a hearing, shelving it to die much like babies were still being shelved to die in Illinois hospitals and abortion clinics.
(As chair of that same committee, Obama once abruptly ended a hearing early, right before Scott and Janet Willis, the parents of six children killed as a result of Illinois' drivers licenses for bribes scandal, were to testify in favor of Choose Life license plate legislation. I was there for that one, too. The Willises had traveled three hours. Reporters filled the room. Obama stalled. He later killed the bill when no one was around.)
Obama's reasons for opposing the bill included the fear that the bill would impose a religious view on the issue. Stanek continued:
I don't recall mentioning religion when I testified against live-birth abortion. I only recall describing a live aborted baby I held in a hospital soiled utility room until he died, and a live aborted baby who was accidentally thrown into the trash.
Neither do I recall religion being brought into the partial-birth abortion ban debate. I recall comparisons made to U.S. laws ensuring animals being killed are treated humanely. I recall testimony that late-term babies feel excruciating pain while being aborted.
Standard pro-abortion talking points. Emphasize women, emphasize fears of religious theocracy, ignore the facts.
Amanda Carpenter wrote on this strange Illinois debacle in Human Events
At the end of the hearing, according to the official records of the Illinois State senate, Obama thanked Stanek for being “very clear and forthright,” but said his concern was that Stanek had suggested “doctors really don’t care about children who are being born with a reasonable prospect of life because they are so locked into their pro-abortion views that they would watch an infant that is viable die.” He told her, “That may be your assessment, and I don’t see any evidence of that. What we are doing here is to create one more burden on a woman and I can’t support that.”
Obama claims he didn't see any "evidence" of a lack of care on the part of doctors who delivered babies alive and allowed them to die. The truth is he had seen pictures, provided by Stanek, of dead infants and was "unfazed". He revealed his cards when he imposed Roe v. Wade on a situation that was demonstrably not abortion. His commitment to Roe overruled common sense, common decency and any vestige of Christian morality.
According to Obama's words, there is nothing wrong with being "motivated by faith" and using "religious language to argue for [a] cause". His speech said that "to say that men and women should not inject their 'personal morality' into public policy debates is a practical absurdity" yet by his actions, he ignored plain evidence under the guise of separation of church and state and women's rights when called to do nothing more than take a stand for humane treatment of humans, a stand even pro-abortion absolutists did not resist.
Don't be deceived by smooth words or a pretty package. By their fruits you shall know them.
No comments:
Post a Comment