BAIPA and Obama; what is your view?

United States
March 25, 2008 4:13pm CST
BAIPA the Born Alive Infant Protection Act which stated all live born babies were guaranteed the same constitutional right to equal protection whether or not they were wanted. Obama voted against it twice. He supports partial birth abortions. A nurse in Illinois discoved babies being born alive and shelved on utility carts and left to die. This is acceptable, according to how Obama voted. Here is a link to the story http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=26868 Is this infanticide? What do you think?
2 people like this
4 responses
@deepti15 (1190)
• India
26 Mar 08
These fetus' have so many health problem if by some tiny chance they survive, it's not for very long. So who is going to take care of these so called viable fetus' outside the womb? Who's paying for their hospital treatment and stay? And, who is going to be forced to take care of them the rest of their lives if by some weird chance they do live? Because if by some tiny chance they survive, they are going to have so many health problems it's going to take a crew of health professionals to take care of if they aren't housed in some kind of facility for the severely mentally handicapped. Sorry, but sentimentality doesn't make for good legislation. Pro lifers are concerned about life in the womb but completely negate it once it is outside the womb and thinks the kid is already on his or her own. They are sentimental about a fetus but reckless and non caring about kids who exist outside the womb. That is completely apparent when it comes to bombing Iraqi kids and all the way to supporting welfare of parents who have kids to take care of but can't find work that will pay them enough to feed these kids. Somehow the right to lifers have it completely backwards and come across as very superficial and extremely sentimental. Sentimentality is a very superficial emotion and doesn't require deep thinking or questioning. It's tantimount to owning alot of stupid stuffed animals and thinking that you are a caring and cuddly person for it. And, that is the emotion prolifers are working from.
26 Mar 08
I agree with you totally,the pro-lifers are entitled to their opinions of course,but they don't seem to care about the lives of children once outside the womb,in fact they then seem to turn on the mother and accuse her of being irresponsible and a scurge on society.
1 person likes this
• United States
26 Mar 08
I am not talking about premature babies; I am talking about fetuses born alive because the mother decides she wants an abortion 5 months into the pregnancy. To induce the birth of a baby before term and let it die on a shelf is disgusting to me.
@lisan23 (442)
• United States
25 Mar 08
BAIPA was presented to the U.S. Congress in 2002, before Obama was a U.S. Senator. It's kind of hard for him to vote no on something he couldn't vote on. He did, however, vote against an Illinois bill that would stop partial ban abortions, however his reason was because it would also make it incredibly difficult for legal abortions to be performed. It also was written poorly and did not protect the health of the mother - just her life. Which is why he voted no on the state level bill. www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h107-2175 That's the government site showing that the BAIPA bill was brought to congress in 2002. Might I suggest using non-biased sources when you try and prove a point. It doesn't prove much when you use a Catholic site which clearly has it's facts wrong.
• United States
26 Mar 08
Obama was an Illinois State Senator in 2002 and clearly was against BAIPA. Perhaps you need to recheck your facts, lisan23. 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. 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.)
1 person likes this
@lisan23 (442)
• United States
27 Mar 08
You're still wrong. He did not vote no to BAIPA because he wasn't in the US Senate. Partial birth abortions account for less than 2% of abortions - and it is typically done in situations where there is serious risk. Obama TRUSTS that the women who are making the decision to get this procedure done know that they are doing. Most women who do have this done aren't doing so lightly - which is why it is such an uncommon medical procedure. Go find a LEGITIMATE source that is unbiased and read it. Until then everything you say on here falls under the influence of your own religious beliefs. The reality is you have absolutely no right to tell another woman what to do. Ever. Unless you want someone telling you what to do with your life, your kids, and your pregnancies.
1 person likes this
@jormins (1223)
• United States
26 Mar 08
I'm assuming you are Catholic so I am curious do you then favor Hillary Clinton because of this? The Clinton's have the same stance on Pro-choice as Obama the last time I checked. If you are for McCain I think you should look at Hagee's endorsement which McCain welcomed and has finally somewhat repudiated: http://www.catholics-united.org/?q=node/138 While I am not a fan of abortion, and am somewhere in the middle of the Pro-Life/Pro-choice debate I think its a minor issue compared to our current economy and the Iraq War. Obama and Clinton have much better credentials to repair the economy and get us out of Iraq in less than 100 years. Looking at the big picture, a better economy I think greatly reduces abortions as money is a vital issue when people are faced with this life changing decision. I believe very few people really want the abortion, they just feel they are trapped and have no other viable way out.
1 person likes this
@jormins (1223)
• United States
26 Mar 08
I think murder is a very strong word. I don't see abortion as so black and white and heaven and hell as many do. Its a very gray issue and I think God realizes that as well. I see people trapped in that situation, many times very young and taken advantage of by someone else, as more of a victim than a murderer. Every situation is different but in many cases I have seen its not so black and white as you make it sound.
• United States
26 Mar 08
Wow that's a little bit crazy he just lost my vote. They're children, how could someone, i just will never understand. Thanks for the info.