Election Issues 3: Abortion
September 15th 2008 03:23
This is a multi-part series on the issues. Hopefully my readers will gain what they need to convince their liberal friends. I’m a conservative. I’m writing this from a conservative point of view and this is not meant as journalism, but commentary.
First, before I go into the candidates views, my view:
1) Abortion can’t be ended 100% by making it illegal, though legislatures should be able to express the will of the people on it.
2) Abortion at any stage is killing a living human being, not discarding a lump of flesh.
3) I am for the “morning after pill”, the morning after.
4) My problem with Roe v. Wade is that it made a constitutional right out of something not covered in the constitution on an issue best left to a state by state decision.
5) I think Sarah Palin goes too far and John McCain is just right.
6) I am very confident that if it ever did go back to a state by state decision, the status quo wouldn’t change much.
I also think anybody that is STUPID enough to think that if abortion is limited then other women’s rights, such as voting and equal treatment by lenders and employers are next, is just that, an idiot. It is as stupid as the school that expelled a student for giving his inhaler to another student in asthmatic distress because they were a quarter mile from the struggling student’s identical inhaler. There is something called discernment, and it is why we don’t convict people for murder when they act in self defense. It is why police don’t pull over people who are speeding, but are doing so to be consistent with the flow of traffic.
We can tell the difference between abortion, and voting.
Over 50% of Americans don't care what a candidate's view is on abortion when deciding who to vote for.
Ok, on to the candidates. John McCain, who will be the policy setter on this, thinks Roe v. Wade was a bad decision (he said so again on The View on Friday.) He, like me, thinks it should be a state by state decision. He would only allow abortion in the case of rape or incest or to save the mother's life.
There is no way his position will become law because of him. The most John McCain can do is appoint judges who may overturn Roe v. Wade, though he has stated, and previous pro-life presidential appointments have shown, that there are many more issues than that which will go into the choice. If Roe v. Wade is overturned it will go back to the states.
One of the things we saw in the electoral college in 2004, and we’ll see again in 2008, is the “Roe effect.” States that have had the least restrictive abortion laws have gone down in population, while restrictive states have gone up. Liberal states have lost a lot of voters in the last thirty six years, which is what makes the middle of the country so important. Electoral college votes have shifted to the "rural" states where abortion is not legal or hard to get.
That being said, the country is pretty evenly split on this. A vast majority of citizens would say Sarah Palin is extreme.
I would also argue that if they knew Obama’s record, they would say he is extreme in the other direction. Barack Obama voted “no” or “present” several times on a bill requiring hospitals to provide care to babies that are born alive during very late term abortions.
These abortions are not protected by Roe v. Wade. But apparently, Barack thinks that any limit on abortion is a bad one, even when it doesn't stop the abortions, just requires attempts to save the baby when born alive. The Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act had come to committee in 2000 and the ACLU testified that “living is not the same as viability.” A hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill., obviously not living up to its name, Christ Hospital, was taking aborted babies born alive and putting them in a soiled utility room to die on metal slabs.
Obama voted against the bill in 2000. He voted “no” on it again in 2002. In 2003 he was one of six legislators in a 6 to 4 vote to not allow a new version out of committee. This version had the language that the Federal version had, about which ultra-liberal Senator Barbara Boxer said “this amendment certainly does not attack Roe in any way.” The federal version passed 98-0.
The language from the federal bill was approved in the committee 10-0, and then the total bill was killed 6-4 again, with Barack voting “no”. He has claimed that Illinois already had a law. Really? Then why was one of the nurses testifying for the “new” law stating that the hospital’s current policy was to take the baby’s picture and make some keepsakes in case the parent wanted them, then holding the baby in a blanket until they died?
This is a living baby, understand. Illinois clearly allows abortion past the Roe v. Wade ruling, including live birth abortions where the baby is starved and exposed to death? A baby that people would adopt if given the opportunity?
In 1997 Obama voted TWICE on a bill to ban partial birth abortion. Based on extensive medical testimony, the Supreme Court ruled that partial birth abortion was never a necessary procedure to save the life of a mother and upheld the federal ban on it. In partial birth abortion, a living baby is delivered into the birth canal feet first enough to puncture the baby’s skull, suck out its brains, collapse the skull and finish delivering the slaughtered child. 80% of Americans are against partial birth abortion. Michelle Obama even stated their support for it in a fundraising letter.
So, while a majority of Americans think abortion should be legal in the case of a woman’s health being at risk or in cases of rape or incest, the vast majority don’t think it should be allowed in all circumstances.
Therefore, John McCain is closer to American opinion than Barack Obama. At least with his votes, Barack Obama hasn’t found an abortion he doesn’t approve of, partial birth, live birth, 1 month in or 8 months.
First, before I go into the candidates views, my view:
1) Abortion can’t be ended 100% by making it illegal, though legislatures should be able to express the will of the people on it.
2) Abortion at any stage is killing a living human being, not discarding a lump of flesh.
3) I am for the “morning after pill”, the morning after.
5) I think Sarah Palin goes too far and John McCain is just right.
6) I am very confident that if it ever did go back to a state by state decision, the status quo wouldn’t change much.
I also think anybody that is STUPID enough to think that if abortion is limited then other women’s rights, such as voting and equal treatment by lenders and employers are next, is just that, an idiot. It is as stupid as the school that expelled a student for giving his inhaler to another student in asthmatic distress because they were a quarter mile from the struggling student’s identical inhaler. There is something called discernment, and it is why we don’t convict people for murder when they act in self defense. It is why police don’t pull over people who are speeding, but are doing so to be consistent with the flow of traffic.
We can tell the difference between abortion, and voting.
Over 50% of Americans don't care what a candidate's view is on abortion when deciding who to vote for.
Ok, on to the candidates. John McCain, who will be the policy setter on this, thinks Roe v. Wade was a bad decision (he said so again on The View on Friday.) He, like me, thinks it should be a state by state decision. He would only allow abortion in the case of rape or incest or to save the mother's life.
There is no way his position will become law because of him. The most John McCain can do is appoint judges who may overturn Roe v. Wade, though he has stated, and previous pro-life presidential appointments have shown, that there are many more issues than that which will go into the choice. If Roe v. Wade is overturned it will go back to the states.
One of the things we saw in the electoral college in 2004, and we’ll see again in 2008, is the “Roe effect.” States that have had the least restrictive abortion laws have gone down in population, while restrictive states have gone up. Liberal states have lost a lot of voters in the last thirty six years, which is what makes the middle of the country so important. Electoral college votes have shifted to the "rural" states where abortion is not legal or hard to get.
That being said, the country is pretty evenly split on this. A vast majority of citizens would say Sarah Palin is extreme.
I would also argue that if they knew Obama’s record, they would say he is extreme in the other direction. Barack Obama voted “no” or “present” several times on a bill requiring hospitals to provide care to babies that are born alive during very late term abortions.
These abortions are not protected by Roe v. Wade. But apparently, Barack thinks that any limit on abortion is a bad one, even when it doesn't stop the abortions, just requires attempts to save the baby when born alive. The Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act had come to committee in 2000 and the ACLU testified that “living is not the same as viability.” A hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill., obviously not living up to its name, Christ Hospital, was taking aborted babies born alive and putting them in a soiled utility room to die on metal slabs.
Obama voted against the bill in 2000. He voted “no” on it again in 2002. In 2003 he was one of six legislators in a 6 to 4 vote to not allow a new version out of committee. This version had the language that the Federal version had, about which ultra-liberal Senator Barbara Boxer said “this amendment certainly does not attack Roe in any way.” The federal version passed 98-0.
The language from the federal bill was approved in the committee 10-0, and then the total bill was killed 6-4 again, with Barack voting “no”. He has claimed that Illinois already had a law. Really? Then why was one of the nurses testifying for the “new” law stating that the hospital’s current policy was to take the baby’s picture and make some keepsakes in case the parent wanted them, then holding the baby in a blanket until they died?
This is a living baby, understand. Illinois clearly allows abortion past the Roe v. Wade ruling, including live birth abortions where the baby is starved and exposed to death? A baby that people would adopt if given the opportunity?
In 1997 Obama voted TWICE on a bill to ban partial birth abortion. Based on extensive medical testimony, the Supreme Court ruled that partial birth abortion was never a necessary procedure to save the life of a mother and upheld the federal ban on it. In partial birth abortion, a living baby is delivered into the birth canal feet first enough to puncture the baby’s skull, suck out its brains, collapse the skull and finish delivering the slaughtered child. 80% of Americans are against partial birth abortion. Michelle Obama even stated their support for it in a fundraising letter.
So, while a majority of Americans think abortion should be legal in the case of a woman’s health being at risk or in cases of rape or incest, the vast majority don’t think it should be allowed in all circumstances.
Therefore, John McCain is closer to American opinion than Barack Obama. At least with his votes, Barack Obama hasn’t found an abortion he doesn’t approve of, partial birth, live birth, 1 month in or 8 months.
| 52 |
| Vote |
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
Sarah Palin gave birth to a baby that the Obama's and other liberals would have killed without a second thought. Their disgusting elitism dictates that since they are perfect, they can only permit perfect children to be born. Perfect children from perfect situations, no less.
A Down Syndrome child toddling around the White House would cause most of the liberals to succomb to apoplexy, Jonathan. That's their biggest gripe against her. She didn't kill Trig and justify their sick delusions.
I agree that most people aren't that interested in abortion and only understand it as a "woman's right to choose." Nice, clean, liberal, antiseptic words that fail to explain the reality at all.