The Obamas: Anti-Life
In 2004, when Barack Obama was running for the US Senate, his wife, Michelle, sent out a fundraising letter that stated the following:
“”We have all been concerned lately with the rise of conservativism in this country, especially as it relates to women. … with no provision to protect the health of the mother, this ban on a legitimate medical procedure (partial birth abortion) is clearly unconstitutional and must be overturned” (Source)
Let’s take a quick look at what the “Partial Birth Abortion” procedure is that the Supreme Court banned in their ruling:
The bill bans “partial-birth abortion,” and it legally defines a partial-birth abortion as any abortion in which the baby is delivered “past the baby’s navel . . . outside the body of the mother,” OR “in the case of head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother,” Before being killed.
The bill would allow the method if it was ever necessary to save a mother’s life. Specifically it states:
“Any physician who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both. This subsection does not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself. This subsection takes effect 1 day after the enactment.”
(Please go HERE to read why anyone who is truly pro-life should not accept that it’s ok to kill the baby to save the mother)
Now the statistics:
- 1% of abortions occur because of rape or incest
- 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems (most common is finding out the baby has Down Syndrome … please click HERE to read my earlier post about this)
- 93% of all abortions are for social reasons (child unwanted/inconvenient
- 52% of abortions occur before the 9th week of pregnancy
- 25% of abortions occur between the 11th and 12th week
- 6% of abortions occur between the 13th and 15th week
- 4% of abortions occur between the 16th and 20th week
- 1% of abortions occur after the 20th week of pregnancy (that represents 16,450 babies) (Source)
Michelle Obama was wrong in her assertion that the ban on Partial Birth Abortion does not make an exception for the “life of the mother”, which it clearly does. Regardless of her inability to read and understand this particular law, her blatant disregard for the lives of the smallest among us is sickening to me. As a mom, I especially do not understand how anyone who has held their own sweet baby in their arms could support this infanticide (the law specifically refers to partial birth abortion as a form of infanticide).
Of course, I shouldn’t be surprised at Mrs. Obama’s position on abortion, since it is her husband that so adamantly fought against protecting the lives of babies who are “born alive” during an abortion procedure. Sen. Obama says that it causes undue stress on the mother to allow these babies to live (read his fight against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act).
Moving the Obamas into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue will have dire and deadly consequences.
Fighting for the Little Ones …
OneMom
9 Responses to "The Obamas: Anti-Life"
[...] fact, I had been writing it in my head most of the day … but then I came home and read OneMom’s comment on my previous post, and had to agree with her. To say the least, I don’t [...]
[...] 12, 2008 by Larry If you have been reading my blog, along with One Mom and other blogs, you will know by now that Barack Obama is very much a supporter of abortion [...]
3 | Cheap Shot « One Mom
July 28, 2008 at 10:08 am
[...] The Obamas: Anti-Life ← Life plank missing in GOP platform? [...]
August 8, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Shawn – I mislead no one. I did not include the whole quote in the interest of space, which is why I linked to the full letter from Mrs. Obama. So the source was not hidden.
You’re swatting at a mosquito while ignoring the lions destroying our society.
September 11, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Why, oh why are people so blinded by this man? I do not understand it at all.
September 18, 2008 at 10:51 am
Yes, moving the O’Bamas into 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. will have dire and deadly consequences. Many more than you address on this site. Go to Investor’s.com and read past editorial July 28,2008 “Barrack O’Bama’s Stealth Socialism”. You will be very, very fearful of O’Bama and his team.
October 8, 2008 at 2:24 am
I’m not for partial birth abortion, in fact, judging by the statistics posted by One Mom, I think the last eleven percent of abortions (past the twelfth week) should not happen, except in dire circumstances. As for partial birth abortion, child bearing is risky, and anyone embarking on that endeavor should take that into consideration.
However, keep in mind that the present administration for five years of the last eight had control of the Whitehouse, both houses of congress, and a good chance at a sympathetic Supreme Court and, yet, the Republicans did nothing about Roe v. Wade. Why? Because it is a wedge issue on which they can count on those who can’t see past the abortion issue to vote for the candidate who is anti choice. Notice, I said anti choice, because they are most certainly not pro life; if they were, they wouldn’t think it was fine to sacrifice hundreds of thousands or millions of lives for the sake of opening up free markets for multinational companies.
To condemn the Obamas for one position makes no sense. The socialism claims are nonsense. If you really want to think about political economic systems, ask yourself how well Chicago School free market economic principles have worked out in the countries in which they have been applied. Investigate Chile, under Pinochet; Indonesia, under Suharto; Argentina, under the military junta; Uruguay; Poland; Russia; China; and Iraq. I doubt you will bother, but I have to recommend that you read “The Shock Doctrine” by Naomi Klein (she’s Canadian, so she doesn’t have a partisan horse in the race).
Those countries in which the Chicago School attempted to apply its theories suffered massive loss of life, misery for most of those remaining alive (except, of course, the newly created super wealthy), and have only bounced back to some semblance of equitable wealth distribution after removing totalitarian leaders and re-instituting social programs. Consider that in each of the countries listed above, the start of the free market experiment was some sort of huge, society-rending event, either military, political, economic or natural disaster, followed by a massive transfer of public wealth to private hands; then think about a recent $700 billion transfer of public wealth to private hands. You may take a different perspective.
Your fear of socialism should be accompanied by an equal fear of unfettered free market capitalism, which is the agenda of the neoconservative wing currently controlling the Republican Party, and of the present administration. Take a look at the Constitution. In the preamble the Framers state that one of the reasons for the Constution is to provide for the common good of the people. The neocons want to privatize everything, from schools to disaster relief and reconstruction to the military, so clearly they don’t agree with that clause.
More important, try to appreciate the lengths to which the Frames went to distribute power among three branches of government so that no one person or group would be able to wrest control of the government. Now consider that unfettered free market capitalism tends to concentrate wealth, and therefore power, in the hands of a few. This is known as plutocracy, and is the natural result of the free market ambitions of the neocons. This is the antithesis of the provisions of our Constitution.
If the neocons succeed in realizing their agenda, abortion will be the least of our worries. Dignity will be afforded to the extremely wealthy, and the rest of the population will be just so much fodder to fuel their desires.
November 18, 2008 at 10:45 am
First of all, this is a very dear subject with me. I am an adopted child of Christian parents. I was adopted at 3 months old and I know, without a shadow of a doubt, that God has foreordained my steps. I could have been a ’splat’ in a bucket but my mother made the right choice and God has blessed me with children and grandchildren of my own. I cry every time I hear the report of the ‘botched abortion’ in which the baby was left in the closet to die alone but God bless, the nurse that held the baby until he passed on to eternal life. If anyone can listen to the nurse give testimony to that event without painful emotion, I truly question your moral thermometer. As a Christian nation, (one nation under God) have we become so morally paralyzed that we have no ‘true’ convictions about what is truly right and wrong? Abortion, in my opinion, is a core problem and it’s outright murder of the innocent. If this issue is allowed to prevail, other societial issues will follow close behind. When people don’t do the right thing in core issues, it’s like one bad apple in a barrel of good ones….the rotten one will affect the others, sooner or later. I thank God that my bio-mom had the right heart to do the right thing. I pray for our nation and all people. My God give us strength to do the right thing at all times.
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
 | Susan on A Sunday Walk |
 | Frances on A Sunday Walk |
 | onemom on A Sunday Walk |
| Tweets that mention … on A Sunday Walk | |
| Susan on A Sunday Walk |
August 8, 2008 at 8:55 pm
In reference to your first quote, how can you place quotes around something you have obviously poorly paraphrased and then have the audacity to link to the source that proves it.
I respect your opinion on this matter as I know how contentious the issue is, but you do yourself or your cause no favors by misleading people.