Obama Supports Infanticide

[cmotherofpirl]

3 times Obama voted against the Infant Born Alive Act. Then he lied about trying to cover up his moral depravity.

[StColette]

This subject comes from the following conversation in another thread:

[quote name='dominicansoul' date='06 November 2009 - 03:54 PM' timestamp='1257540881' post='1997319']
*sigh*...i guess what I was trying to say was, how can a man who supports infanticide have any compassion???

He's very hard to read...I've seen him smile and laugh...but even that seemed to be staged...most of the time obama seems very dry and emotionless...sometimes even more so than that cardboard, Al Gore...
[/quote]


[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='06 November 2009 - 03:56 PM' timestamp='1257540963' post='1997322']
He does't support infanticide, but thats a different subject.


Jim
[/quote]


[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='06 November 2009 - 03:57 PM' timestamp='1257541022' post='1997325']
Yes he does.
[/quote]


[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='06 November 2009 - 04:00 PM' timestamp='1257541211' post='1997327']
Prove it


Jim
[/quote]


[quote name='dominicansoul' date='06 November 2009 - 04:07 PM' timestamp='1257541627' post='1997330']
why dont' you prove he doesn't?
[/quote]


[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='06 November 2009 - 04:08 PM' timestamp='1257541698' post='1997331']
Obama for Infanticide.
3x he voted against the Infant Born Alive Act.
http://www.nrlc.org/News_and_Views/Aug08/nv081108part2.html
[/quote]


[quote name='dominicansoul' date='06 November 2009 - 04:18 PM' timestamp='1257542302' post='1997334']
I'm not trying to "change the subject" but the subject at hand is that he showed "insensitivity" at the news of the massacre at Ft. Hood. My point is that since he is extremely insensitive to the life in the womb, why would he give a flip about soldiers getting massacred by one of their own?

He shows total indifference to me...except when it comes to his own aggrandizement.
[/quote]

[aalpha1989]

Abortion is infanticide.

[Nihil Obstat]

Voting against the Born Alive act is pretty appalling.

[CatherineM]

He's made it pretty clear where he stands on the issue. I go away for the day, and come back, and find debates about something that is pretty cut and dry.

[KnightofChrist]

Obama supported abortion doctors who were taking babies that survived the abortion, being placed in a laundry room to die. That is his support of infanticide.

[aalpha1989]

Abortion [i]is[/i] infanticide.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='06 November 2009 - 09:15 PM' timestamp='1257556541' post='1997415']
Abortion [i]is[/i] infanticide.
[/quote]
But if the baby survived the abortion, Obama approves of them leaving out to die, exactly like the ancient pagans.

[Nihil Obstat]

Yea, even most pro aborts aren't that disgusting. Although I guess it's the logical extension of allowing abortion.

[zunshynn]

Personally, I don't understand why pro-aborts think its more disgusting to kill a baby right after a failed abortion, but don't see anything wrong with it before. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad for the restrictions on partial-birth abortion. But I don't get why someone who is pro-abortion would be appalled by partial birth abortion. I mean, the only difference is a couple seconds of exposure to air, no?

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='zunshynn' date='06 November 2009 - 08:42 PM' timestamp='1257561726' post='1997471']
Personally, I don't understand why pro-aborts think its more disgusting to kill a baby right after a failed abortion, but don't see anything wrong with it before. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad for the restrictions on partial-birth abortion. But I don't get why someone who is pro-abortion would be appalled by partial birth abortion. I mean, the only difference is a couple seconds of exposure to air, no?
[/quote]
I know. There's no fundamental difference. They willfully ignore that fact.

Although my philosophy professor has a theory about beings taking on "more personhood" as they attain more attributes of what constitutes a person. i.e. One can be more or less of a person if they possess more or less attributes of personhood.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='06 November 2009 - 09:31 PM' timestamp='1257561070' post='1997450']
But if the baby survived the abortion, Obama approves of them leaving out to die, exactly like the ancient pagans.
[/quote]
I understand Obama's stance, and it is no different than abortion except that more babies will die.

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='06 November 2009 - 09:33 PM' timestamp='1257561220' post='1997460']
Yea, even most pro aborts aren't that disgusting. Although I guess it's the logical extension of allowing abortion.
[/quote]

It is not more disgusting, they are equally grievous offences to human life.


[quote name='zunshynn' date='06 November 2009 - 09:42 PM' timestamp='1257561726' post='1997471']
Personally, I don't understand why pro-aborts think its more disgusting to kill a baby right after a failed abortion, but don't see anything wrong with it before. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad for the restrictions on partial-birth abortion. But I don't get why someone who is pro-abortion would be appalled by partial birth abortion. I mean, the only difference is a couple seconds of exposure to air, no?
[/quote]

yeah.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='06 November 2009 - 08:44 PM' timestamp='1257561897' post='1997474']

It is not more disgusting, they are equally grievous offences to human life.

[/quote]
Good point. I guess I mean in their minds.

[elizabeth09]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='06 November 2009 - 05:34 PM' timestamp='1257550495' post='1997376']
Abortion is infanticide.
[/quote]

Being For-Life, I hate it when people say that they do not want children, when they promise to have children in marriage. So, they just lie agnest God and they also lie to the people who are their.

[JimR-OCDS]

[color="#000000"][color="#000000"]Here's an opinion from the Official Journal of The American Academy of Pediatrics on the The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA), back in 2005.

I suggest you read what doctors, not bureaucrats or people with political agendas had to say about it.

This is a part of the article.

[/color]

[color="#000000"][quote]
Under the BAIPA, the DHHS interprets EMTALA to protect all "born-alive"[sup] [/sup]infants; hospitals and physicians violating regulatory requirements[sup] [/sup]face agency-sanctioned monetary penalties or a "private right[sup] [/sup]of action by any individual harmed as a direct result." According[sup] [/sup]to its memorandum, the DHHS will investigate allegations of[sup] [/sup]EMTALA violations whenever it finds evidence that a newborn[sup] [/sup]was not provided with at least a medical screening examination[sup] [/sup]under circumstances in which a "prudent layperson observer"[sup] [/sup]could conclude from the infant's "appearance or behavior"[sup] [/sup]that it was "suffering from an emergency medical condition."[sup] [/sup]The memorandum fails to clarify which observers qualify as prudent,[sup] [/sup]what infant appearance or behavior is relevant, or what defines[sup] [/sup]an emergency medical condition. Because these evaluative criteria[sup] [/sup]are not constrained by reference to relevant standards of medical[sup] [/sup]care, the agency arguably substitutes a nonprofessional's[sup] [/sup]presumed sagacious assessment of survivability for reasonable[sup] [/sup]medical judgment.[sup] [/sup][/color][color="#000000"]Indeed, under a straightforward reading of the instruction,[sup] [/sup]a family member could conceivably trigger an investigation after[sup] [/sup]observing a relative deliver a 20-week fetus who maintains a[sup] [/sup]heartbeat for an hour before its death. Most physicians would[sup] [/sup]not consider this an emergency medical condition and, rather[sup] [/sup]than perform a screening examination, would provide comfort[sup] [/sup]for the newborn and support for the family. The guideline, however,[sup] [/sup]does not state that professional acumen trumps the layperson's[sup] [/sup]observations in these instances; thus, physicians are left unclear[sup] [/sup]about whether screening examinations are required for all newborns[sup] [/sup]regardless of a priori, reasoned considerations of survivability.[sup] [/sup]In this context, the NRP Steering Committee opinion states that[sup] [/sup]"at the time of delivery... the medical condition and prognosis[sup] [/sup]of the newly born infant should be assessed. At that point decisions[sup] [/sup]about withholding or discontinuing medical treatment that is[sup] [/sup]considered futile may be considered by... providers in conjunction[sup] [/sup]with the parents acting in the best interest of their child."[sup] [/sup]However, most pediatricians skilled in screening and resuscitation[sup] [/sup]are not currently called on to perform this function when the[sup] [/sup]gestational age of a nonviable fetus is reasonably certain before[sup] [/sup]delivery. If under the law screening is now required at any[sup] [/sup]gestational age, professional procedure immediately after previable[sup] [/sup]births may need modification. More worrisome, threatened aggressive[sup] [/sup]investigations of alleged EMTALA violations at the soft edges[sup] [/sup]of viability, where futility remains a matter of debate, jeopardize[sup] [/sup]the normative ethical practice of offering discretionary [/color][/color]palliative[sup] [/sup]care.[sup]

[size="3"][/quote]


Jim[/size][/sup]

Edited November 18, 2009 by JimR-OCDS