August 17, 2008
Obama's Christian Creds Vs. Abortion and InfanticideBy Kyle-Anne Shiver
If there is one issue, upon which Barack Obama has been willing to take a front-and-center political stand, it is on abortion and, yes, even infanticide. On this issue, amidst his many other flip-flops, Barack Obama has been consistent.
And really, is it any wonder that Barack, father of daughters, supports completely unfettered abortion?
Isn't this absolutely consistent with his highly-touted Christian faith?
Last March, at a townhall meeting in Pennsylvania, Obama explained his position perfectly:
This, "I don't want them punished with a baby," is perhaps the most self-revelatory statement Barack Obama has uttered in public since he began his campaign for the Presidency. It goes far beyond Bill Clinton's, "Let's keep abortion safe, legal and rare." It goes far beyond the "I personally object, but must allow choice in a pluralistic society" stand of both John Kerry and Hillary Clinton.
Because it goes to the personal. It goes to the extent of wholehearted approval of killing one's own grandchildren if they happen to have been conceived inconveniently.
Obama's baby-as-punishment dogma is identical to the positions of two of his prime lobbyist backers, Planned Parenthood and NARAL, which paint abortion as the essential savior of women and their opportunities for worldly success. Anything less than no-holds-barred, free-for-all abortion is seen by these groups as an injustice to women.
But, unlike Obama, these pro-abortion groups stop short of proclaiming Christian bona fides.
That's because this pro-abortion position is antithetical to the Biblical view of babies. First, there's the ancient admonition, "Thou shalt not kill," which pertains most especially to innocent human beings, and for those who might not remember, this is one of the "Big" Ten Commandments.
Who, among us, could possibly be more innocent than a baby, safely nestled and growing in his own mother's womb?
Then there's this tidbit: "Children are a gift of the Lord; they are his reward." (Psalm 127:5) And this, "You formed my inmost being; you knit me in my mother's womb." (Psalm 139:13) The Bible is consistent on the human-life issue. Absolutely consistent. No hypocrisy from God; that would not do.
Somewhere, between finding Jesus in Jeremiah Wright's church, and being elected to the state Senate in Illinois, Obama seems to have found more solidarity with Planned Parenthood and NARAL than with God. That's something Obama can address with God at his passing from this life, but for now, voters must consider Obama's politics of faith vs. his unequivocal support for killing innocents.
Pro-abortion candidates have been with us since Roe, but never before has a candidate been so brazenly hypocritical as to tout his Christian creds so forcefully in public, while saying he not only supports a woman's "right to choose," but that he would also prefer abortions for his own daughters.
Two sides of a single mouth are simply not big enough to hold this diabolical hypocrisy.
Obama on "Reproductive Justice," A Perfect Bolshevik Stance
It seems odd to me that anyone so forthrightly claiming to be a stalwart Christian believer thinks of abortion in terms of sexual equality. Rendering absolute "reproductive justice" through unfettered abortion seems antithetical to the tenets of Christianity, as traditionally professed and practiced.
But since our scientists have yet to discover a method to genetically alter our species in such manner that all future men and women would be born with both male and female reproductive capabilities, I assume that killing "unwanted" and "inconvenient" offspring is seen as the only way to provide this ethereal "equality." Never mind the obvious reality that "reproductive justice" is something God, our Creator, deigned to withhold.
As a privileged child-bearer myself, I find it quite sad that men can never have this unequaled honor. On this, I'm terribly at odds with Obama and NARAL.
Interestingly enough, it was the Bolshevik, atheist communists who first promoted this thoroughly twisted, baby-as-hardship ideology, just as it is the communist countries today that so wholeheartedly support abortion as a way of managing population growth and female workers' utility.
The thorough distortion of how abortion became legal in the United States is, perhaps, the most successful leftist propaganda victory of the 20th Century.
One of the atheist founders of the National Association for Repeal of Abortion Laws (NARAL), which later became the National Abortion Rights Action League, and now calls itself the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, was Bernard N. Nathanson, M.D. Dr. Nathansan performed tens of thousands of abortions during his career, even on friends and relatives, and once even on the mother of his own child.
After 20 years on the front lines as an ardent promoter of "reproductive justice," however, Dr. Nathanson changed his mind on the nature of killing unborn citizens. His was not a religious awakening; it was an ultrasound awakening. With the advent of ultrasound technology in the early 1970s and the astounding advances of the 80s, it was no longer possible to pretend that abortion was anything other than the wanton killing of another, smaller, (and ultimately more innocent) human being.
Dr. Nathanson was quick to write of the fallacious and deceptive history of NARAL, the organization he helped to found.
[Note: Years after Dr. Nathanson rejected abortion on medical grounds, he converted to Catholicism.]
One of those working most closely with Nathanson in the early days of the pro-abortion movement, was Lawrence Lader, the man whom Betty Friedan has called "the father of the reproductive rights movement." Dr. Nathanson worked closely with Mr. Lader for more than a decade, and wrote of him:
Dr. Nathanson has also recounted how he, Lader and the other true Bolshevik radicals in those heady, hazy Sixties days, manipulated the media, fed them utterly false statistics on maternal deaths by illegal abortion, and systematically pummeled the American public with fallacious press releases on all matters pertaining to abortion, still illegal then in all 50 states.
According to Nathanson, Lader needed a focal-point, personal enemy at which to aim the bombardment of anti-authoritarian propaganda being daily churned out by his minions at NARAL. Who better than the Catholic Church, surmised Lader. "Our favorite tack was to blame the Church for the death of every woman from a botched abortion." (Nathanson; The Hand of God: A Journey from Death to Life by the Abortion Doctor Who Changed His Mind; p. 89)
Due to the Lader-led blitzkrieg against abortion prohibitions in New York state, NARAL accomplished within a single year, the complete destruction of a statute against abortion that had been considered sacrosanct and "untouchable."
Even Pravda could not have lied better than the NYT. What a victory.
Having defeated New York's "principalities and powers," the new NARAL vanguard was in huge demand to "consult on political strategy and tactics with pro-abortion leaders in many other states."
And the rest, as they say, is history. Within 3 scant years, the entire Nation was delivered from the "principalities and powers" of the dastardly Catholic Church, traditional American morality and even the Hippocratic Oath, by the hands of a few diehard Bolsheviks and 7 Supreme Court Justices.
In yet another historical irony, Barack Obama now claims to be fighting for abortion rights on the side of his Christian Church and against the "principalities and powers" of the dastardly, illiberal, putatively un-Christian pro-lifers.
You can't make this stuff up.
Obama, the NARAL Poster Child Candidate
On the matter of what he calls "reproductive justice," Barack Obama is as stalwart a fighter as one can find in America today.
No wonder Barack is the NARAL poster child candidate.
Speaking to a conference of Planned Parenthood in July 2007, Obama promised: "The first thing I will do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act."
There are, today, more than 300 statutes, among our 50 states, that place restrictions upon legal abortions. These statutes range from parental notification restrictions to those banning Partial-Birth Abortion. These 300 state statutes have faced numerous Constitutional challenges, and have been upheld by the Supreme Court again, again, again and again.
These statutes do undoubtedly, however, cut into the millions paid to Planned Parenthood, the single largest provider of abortions.
The federal Freedom of Choice Act was introduced in 1989 as a way to circumvent state restrictions on abortion. It effectively codifies Roe v Wade into the federal legal code.
Under the Clinton Administration, NARAL and Planned Parenthood had high hopes for its passage, but the bill ended up stalled in committee because, according to some of its then detractors, it did not go far enough. The original bill allowed for states to opt out of paying with taxpayer money for the abortions of poor women, and also allowed states to give "conscience exemptions" for medical personnel, who objected to abortion.
The new bill, however, has eliminated these "problems," and completely meets with pro-abortion activists' ultimate aims, and it is the one that Obama plans to sign into law. This law, if passed and signed, will strike down every current restriction on abortion within all 50 states.
The Freedom of Choice Act is completely retroactive.
The Freedom of Choice Act makes it against the law for a medical professional to deny any woman this "right," even on account of personal moral conscience. And it makes this "right" to abortion sacrosanct for every woman, regardless of ability to pay; the state must provide what the woman cannot.
The work of 35 years, by countless individuals, to offer even the most meager protections to unborn citizens goes on the trash heap with the 48 million corpses of legal abortion.
Never in history has an American presidential candidate been so ardent a warrior against the protection of innocent human life.
Let freedom ring. And let those millions of dollars flow - utterly unrestricted - into those abortionists' coffers. What a proud day for America that will be.
Obama on Infanticide
What if a baby happens to survive (some would say "miraculously") attempts by the abortionist to kill him?
The issue of what to do with babies who inconveniently survived the abortionist's killing skill was raised in Illinois while Barack Obama was a state senator there.
Jill Stanek, a nurse in a Chicago hospital performing abortions, brought the issue to the forefront after she held a dying-infant survivor for the hour it took the little one to die. Standard procedure had called for the baby to be placed in a soiled utility closet with the other medical waste, but Stanek couldn't stand this, so she cradled the infant in her arms instead.
Afterwards, she set out to determine how on earth throwing babies out with the trash had become a "standard procedure" in this One Nation under God.
Reporter, Dennis Byrne, investigated Stanek's story for the Chicago Sun Times in 1999, and was horrified at his findings. He had expected the hospital to deny its procedure of putting live babies out with the trash. Instead he learned that Ms. Stanek's story was not only true, but that the hospital didn't even regard this as problematic.
In his resulting article, entitled, "A New Low in Heartlessness," he wrote:
So what do you call an abortion procedure in which the fetus is born alive, then is left to die without medical care? Infanticide? Murder?"
Infanticide? Murder? State Senator, Barack Obama, certainly did not think so.
Due largely to the stout-hearted efforts of this one nurse, Jill Stanek, a protection bill was introduced in the Illinois state Senate in February 2001. Nurse Stanek spoke to legislators in formal testimony, offering her detailed, eyewitness account of live infants tossed out to die alone amidst the medical waste.
And Barack Obama, self-proclaimed Christian father of two daughters, was the sole speaker against the proposed bill that would have guaranteed some slight dignity to the passing of babies or some medical care for the tiny survivors. For two years, this Illinois bill was debated and held up in Obama's own committee. The bill failed, of course, due largely to the heroic efforts of state Senator Barack Obama.
The federal Born Alive Infants Protection Act, identical in all respects to the Illinois bill, was passed in 2002 by the United States Congress unanimously. Even Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer and Hillary Clinton voted for it. This bill was such a no-brainer protection against out-and-out infanticide that it even had the backing of NARAL.
As Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., has asked:
Apparently, Barack Obama is this cold-blooded.
Barack Obama chose not to avoid the issue of infanticide, which would have been more in keeping with his "present" stance on other hot issues. He chose, instead, to stridently oppose any protections whatsoever for babies who survived abortions.
Obviously, Barack Obama did not want to take any chances that anyone, anywhere in these United States, might possibly be punished with a baby.
Perfect Bolshevism, yes. Christianity? No.