There has been a lot of justifiable outrage over an essay published in the “Journal of Medical Ethics” which attempted to “logically” argue in favor of infanticide. The two supposed ethicists who authored the study referred to the practice as “after-birth abortion,” in an effort to avoid the negative connotations associated with taking the life of a helpless newborn infant.
People the world over are outraged, and rightfully so. But what I think this outrage should remind citizens of the United States of, especially this year, is that President Barack Obama is on record as opposing the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act when he was a state senator in Illinois.
The “ethics” essay asserted :”Merely being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life.” By his actions, it would appear that President Obama agreed with that absurd reasoning, at least with respect to what he called the “previable fetus.”
Let me give a little background. In August of 2008, National Right to Life released documents proving that in 2003 then-Illinois state Senator Barack Obama was responsible for killing legislation to provide care and protection for babies who were born alive after an abortion. NRLC also showed that he later misrepresented the contents of the bill in question.
When he was asked about NRLC’s charges in a televised CBN interview with David Brody, Obama responded: “I hate to say that people are lying, but here’s a situation where folks are lying.” FactCheck.org agreed with NRLC’s assertions about the language of the bill, and NRLC asked President Obama for an apology for calling us liars. Well, three and a half years later, we are still waiting.
Perhaps Obama is afraid of the public knowing that he opposed legal protection for what he called a “previable fetus” who had survived an abortion attempt. He should be.
Think back and examine a very, very revealing moment in the 2008 election cycle, when Pastor Rick Warren asked Obama this question: “At what point does a baby get human rights in your view?” We all remember the answer: “I think that, whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade.”
Pastor Warren had asked that question in a very brilliant way, asking when a “baby get[s] human rights.” In a way, Obama was paralyzed by the very premise of the question because his logic allows for infanticide.
Several days ago, a man named Bob emailed me asking a very commonsense question about unborn babies, especially those diagnosed with an illness: “Doesn’t everybody deserve a chance?”
Yes, Bob, pro-life people believe they do. Unfortunately, there are some people out there who disagree, and one of them is your president.