Obama supports infantcide? More pro-choice than NARAL???

[HookEm]

Even Boxer and Kennedy supported this bill. What a nutcase.

http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=26868

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18647

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20080228_The_Elephant_in_the_Room__Obama__A_harsh_ ideologue_hidden_by_a_feel-good_image.html
At the federal level, legislation was presented called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) which 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 and by an overwhelming majority in the House. President Bush signed the bill into law in 2002.

Stanek wrote that, “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.”

“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 2002, as an Illinois legislator, Obama voted against the Induced Infant Liability Act, which would have protected babies that survived late-term abortions. That same year a similar federal law, the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, was signed by President Bush. Only 15 members of the U.S. House opposed it, and it passed the Senate unanimously on a voice vote.

Both the Illinois and the federal bill sought equal treatment for babies who survived premature inducement for the purpose of abortion and wanted babies who were born prematurely and given live-saving medical attention.




That bill was the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. During the partial-birth abortion debate, Congress heard testimony about babies that had survived attempted late-term abortions. Nurses testified that these preterm living, breathing babies were being thrown into medical waste bins to die or being "terminated" outside the womb. With the baby now completely separated from the mother, it was impossible to argue that the health or life of the mother was in jeopardy by giving her baby appropriate medical treatment.

The act simply prohibited the killing of a baby born alive. To address the concerns of pro-choice lawmakers, the bill included language that said nothing "shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand or contract any legal status or legal right" of the baby. In other words, the bill wasn't intruding on Roe v. Wade.

Who would oppose a bill that said you couldn't kill a baby who was born? Not Kennedy, Boxer or Hillary Rodham Clinton. Not even the hard-core National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). Obama, however, is another story. The year after the Born Alive Infants Protection Act became federal law in 2002, identical language was considered in a committee of the Illinois Senate. It was defeated with the committee's chairman, Obama, leading the opposition.

Let's be clear about what Obama did, once in 2003 and twice before that. He effectively voted for infanticide. He voted to allow doctors to deny medically appropriate treatment or, worse yet, actively kill a completely delivered living baby. Infanticide - I wonder if he'll add this to the list of changes in his next victory speech and if the crowd will roar: "Yes, we can." How could someone possibly justify such a vote? In March 2001, Obama was the sole speaker in opposition to the bill on the floor of the Illinois Senate. He said: "We're saying they are persons entitled to the kinds of protections provided to a child, a 9-month child delivered to term. I mean, it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal-protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child." So according to Obama, "they," babies who survive abortions or any other preterm newborns, should be permitted to be killed because giving legal protection to preterm newborns would have the effect of banning all abortions

[gpamp]

Oh man. You will cut and paste anything, won't you?

[HookEm]

Is that your defense for your candidate's desire for infantcide?


Oh man. You will cut and paste anything, won't you?


http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/02/links_to_barack.html

Links to the 92 General Assembly of IL Voting Record

[gpamp]

Is that your defense for your candidate's desire for infantcide?





http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/02/links_to_barack.html

Links to the 92 General Assembly of IL Voting Record
How about my version of your post:

www.republicanjesusfreaks.com (http://www.republicanjesusfreaks.com)

"John McCain found out today, that Jesus Christ was born in the Middle East. Advisers told him just after his morning enema. McCain has now laid out a plan to kill our Savior, in hopes that it will deter attacks on American soil."

It's just GOT to be true!

[HookEm]

You really know very little about your candidate, do you?
Google BARACK and BOIPA.

You don't even present a nice straw man anymore. It's sad watching you deteriorate before our very eyes, but that's what happens.

How about my version of your post:

www.republicanjesusfreaks.com (http://www.republicanjesusfreaks.com/)

"John McCain found out today, that Jesus Christ was born in the Middle East. Advisers told him just after his morning enema. McCain has now laid out a plan to kill our Savior, in hopes that it will deter attacks on American soil."

It's just GOT to be true!

[gpamp]

You really know very little about your candidate, do you?
Google BARACK and BOIPA.

You don't even present a nice straw man anymore. It's sad watching you deteriorate before our very eyes, but that's what happens.
Oh, I can do that, too.

You really know very little about your candidate, do you?
Google MCCAIN and RACIST.

You're just one gigantic bias, aren't you? It's sad, watching you regurgitate blurbs from sites that believe exactly as you do, with no concept of the word "unbiased". But you're the nature of the beast.

[aceman85turbo]

Oh, I can do that, too.

You really know very little about your candidate, do you?
Google MCCAIN and RACIST.

You're just one gigantic bias, aren't you? It's sad, watching you regurgitate blurbs from sites that believe exactly as you do, with no concept of the word "unbiased". But you're the nature of the beast.

Please for once, try a logical response that is not argumentative.

Thanks

[jyro]

Oh, I can do that, too.

You really know very little about your candidate, do you?
Google MCCAIN and RACIST.

You're just one gigantic bias, aren't you? It's sad, watching you regurgitate blurbs from sites that believe exactly as you do, with no concept of the word "unbiased". But you're the nature of the beast.


do you do the song writing too?

[HookEm]

He was criticized by rival pro-choice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro-choice) candidates in the Democratic primary and by his Republican pro-life (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro-life) opponent in the general election for a series of "present" or "no" votes on late-term abortion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-term_abortion) and parental notification (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minors_and_abortion) issues.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-10>[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_Senate_career_of_Barack_Obama#cite_note-10)</SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
<SUP>From Wiki</SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/01/obama_campaign_mounts_defense.html
Chicago Tribune


The conservative former diplomat said Obama’s vote against a bill that would have outlawed a form of late-term abortion denied unborn children of their equal rights. Both candidates — one an outspoken conservative and the other a favorite of party liberals — are black.

“I would still be picking cotton if the country’s moral principles had not been shaped by the Declaration of Independence,” Keyes said. He said Obama “has broken and rejected those principles — he has taken the slaveholder’s position.”


AP/MSNBC


This is like shooting fish in a barrel. Do you really deny your candidate supports both PBA and opposed the Infant Protection Act?

His voting record is available for all to see.
Oh, I can do that, too.

You really know very little about your candidate, do you?
Google MCCAIN and RACIST.

You're just one gigantic bias, aren't you? It's sad, watching you regurgitate blurbs from sites that believe exactly as you do, with no concept of the word unbiased. But you're the nature of the beast.

[HookEm]

BTW, if he's such a racist....

why does Condi want to be his running mate?


Oh, I can do that, too.

You really know very little about your candidate, do you?
Google MCCAIN and RACIST.

You're just one gigantic bias, aren't you? It's sad, watching you regurgitate blurbs from sites that believe exactly as you do, with no concept of the word "unbiased". But you're the nature of the beast.

[slow99]

Obama or Reggie Bush?

[gpamp]

For one, HookEm, your methods are ridiculous. Your formula is this:

Throw something outrageous out. Let's see... "OBAMA WANTS TO KILL YOUR BABY!!"

Then, when someone points out how ridiculous you've become, you simply say something along the lines of "prove me wrong" or "source?"

It makes it so, that it's no fun to talk about politics with you. You're not really all there, when it comes to these debates. You're trying too hard, to find something that's not there, half the time. And the other half, you're glossing over things, in order to make your point more outrageously.

For one, the first reference you posted, was Wiki. ANYBODY can edit stuff on Wiki. I can go on there, and say something about John McCain wanting to off JC, and if no one contests it, it posts it up there. Being that's the first reference you posted, why would I even consider your other references? You've already shown that you'll believe anything, as long as it seems like something that'll bash whoever is against your man.

So, to answer you, aceman, I don't enjoy responding with arguments. (Although it is fun to fling the same stupid logic HookEm uses, back at him. It's ironic that when I do it, I'm "deteriorating" but when he does it, it's... er... logical?) But why would I waste a logical response on fantastical cut-and-paste posts?

[gpamp]

BTW, if he's such a racist....

why does Condi want to be his running mate?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, delete this. Please. I can't take it.

Um... maybe because she doesn't mind the burning crosses as long as she has power?

Power does that to you.

[slow99]

Agreed. Not saying I agree with Obama's stance on most things, but Hookem's posts about it are growing very tiresome.

[HookEm]

Well, do we have a bet or not?

OR are you all talk?

The Illinois House is a fanatical web site?

Fact is, you are in denial.

Pathetic, really.

Prove he voted for the Infant Protection Act.

www.google.com (http://www.google.com/).

I tell you what....

I'll even wager something on it. LEt's go...100 bucks toward the GOP if I win, 100 to the DNC if you win.


For one, HookEm, your methods are ridiculous. Your formula is this:

Throw something outrageous out. Let's see... "OBAMA WANTS TO KILL YOUR BABY!!"

Then, when someone points out how ridiculous you've become, you simply say something along the lines of "prove me wrong" or "source?"

It makes it so, that it's no fun to talk about politics with you. You're not really all there, when it comes to these debates. You're trying too hard, to find something that's not there, half the time. And the other half, you're glossing over things, in order to make your point more outrageously.

For one, the first reference you posted, was Wiki. ANYBODY can edit stuff on Wiki. I can go on there, and say something about John McCain wanting to off JC, and if no one contests it, it posts it up there. Being that's the first reference you posted, why would I even consider your other references? You've already shown that you'll believe anything, as long as it seems like something that'll bash whoever is against your man.

So, to answer you, aceman, I don't enjoy responding with arguments. (Although it is fun to fling the same stupid logic HookEm uses, back at him. It's ironic that when I do it, I'm "deteriorating" but when he does it, it's... er... logical?) But why would I waste a logical response on fantastical cut-and-paste posts?

[slow99]

Did you mean, "infanticide"?

[HookEm]

Try the ignore button?

Agreed. Not saying I agree with Obama's stance on most things, but Hookem's posts about it are growing very tiresome.

[HookEm]

Did you mean, "infanticide"?


I left an I out. Ready the firing squad, Cap'n.

[slow99]

Try the ignore button?

I'm just trying to keep track of all the members who are making the school from which I earn my MBA, look like a joke. So far there's Bones, Runninhorn, whoever that douchebag in the sports forum was before he got ran off, the guy who posts an Obama thread every two seconds...

[HookEm]

Hint: If you dont want to hear about Obama's politics, stay away from the political board.

Just sayin....

I'm just trying to keep track of all the members who are making the school from which I earn my MBA, look like a joke. So far there's Bones, Runninhorn, whoever that douchebag in the sports forum was before he got ran off, the guy who posts an Obama thread every two seconds...

[gpamp]

I did the intelligent thing.

Rather than search for cherries to pick, as you have, and continue, to do, I searched "Born Alive Infant Protection Act" (the full name of it), because I wanted to know what was in it. Sometimes, really stupid laws are hidden in these things, that make them catch 22s for someone to vote for.

However, I noticed that no legitimate news sites had anything on it. By "legitimate" I mean "unbiased".

Every site that came up was right-wing operated. Hell, the article that you cited was written by Amanda Carpenter. Here's her bio:

Miss Carpenter has become an integralpart of the Human Events team of committed conservatives reporting the news the left-wing media ignore. She roams Capitol Hill to report breaking news for Human Events, questioning members of Congress about pressing issues. Miss Carpenter has made numerous media appearances that include segments on the BBC, Fox News’ “Hannity & Colmes” and “The Big Story with John Gibson,” and MSNBC’s “Tucker.”

I'm sure there's no slant on that, at ALL.

(on a side note, she's friggin' hot.)

So, after seeing only right-wing sites yelling about the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, with the occasional shout at Obama, I tried the News part of Google.

9 stories. (J.D. Salinger wrote it)

That's it.

And all of them were from far-right conservative websites.

I'm sorry, but you're out of credibility.

[HookEm]

So, in all of your research you MUST have found a site refuting my claim, right?



I did the intelligent thing.

Rather than search for cherries to pick, as you have, and continue, to do, I searched "Born Alive Infant Protection Act" (the full name of it), because I wanted to know what was in it. Sometimes, really stupid laws are hidden in these things, that make them catch 22s for someone to vote for.

However, I noticed that no legitimate news sites had anything on it. By "legitimate" I mean "unbiased".

Every site that came up was right-wing operated. Hell, the article that you cited was written by Amanda Carpenter. Here's her bio:

Miss Carpenter has become an integralpart of the Human Events team of committed conservatives reporting the news the left-wing media ignore. She roams Capitol Hill to report breaking news for Human Events, questioning members of Congress about pressing issues. Miss Carpenter has made numerous media appearances that include segments on the BBC, Fox News’ “Hannity & Colmes” and “The Big Story with John Gibson,” and MSNBC’s “Tucker.”

I'm sure there's no slant on that, at ALL.

(on a side note, she's friggin' hot.)

So, after seeing only right-wing sites yelling about the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, with the occasional shout at Obama, I tried the News part of Google.

9 stories. (J.D. Salinger wrote it)

That's it.

And all of them were from far-right conservative websites.

I'm sorry, but you're out of credibility.

[slow99]

Hint: If you dont want to hear about Obama's politics, stay away from the political board.

Just sayin....

The political forum is where the action is, lately. :o

[HookEm]

Pam Sutherland is the president and CEO of the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council. She says Obama voted "present" at least seven times to provide cover to other abortion-rights supporters on such bills as the "Born Alive Infant Protection Act."


From NPR, another fanatical right wing site.....
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18348437

[gpamp]

So, in all of your research you MUST have found a site refuting my claim, right?
There you go again.

See, you KNOW I didn't find any that refute your claim, because the only sites that mention such an obscure act are extremely conservative sites. As I said, the LEGITIMATE sites say nothing about it, whatsoever.

So, in a sense, you're right. But only because you're ignorant enough to only believe what you're told by those that believe what you believe, rather than find out through legitimate sources.

It's sad, really, watching you deteriorate into just one of the sheeple. Believe me, I would much rather just play your game with you, and post some outrageous claim from the far left, about the far right, and send you on a goose chase to prove it wrong, just to show you and those that read the interaction, how funny your posts have become. It gives me no joy to fill you in on how ignorant you are, and how selective your reading is.

[HookEm]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml

CBS News adequate?

He voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive. He supported allowing retired police officers to carry concealed weapons, but opposed allowing people to use banned handguns to defend against intruders in their homes. And the list of sensitive topics goes on.




There you go again.

See, you KNOW I didn't find any that refute your claim, because the only sites that mention such an obscure act are extremely conservative sites. As I said, the LEGITIMATE sites say nothing about it, whatsoever.

So, in a sense, you're right. But only because you're ignorant enough to only believe what you're told by those that believe what you believe, rather than find out through legitimate sources.

It's sad, really, watching you deteriorate into just one of the sheeple. Believe me, I would much rather just play your game with you, and post some outrageous claim from the far left, about the far right, and send you on a goose chase to prove it wrong, just to show you and those that read the interaction, how funny your posts have become. It gives me no joy to fill you in on how ignorant you are, and how selective your reading is.

[Denny]

I'm surprised at everyone just trying to take shots at someone posting information, rather than the information that is posted (especially in THIS thread)!

Has anyone actually read this shit?!?! Obama is as extreme left as it comes. He doesn't base his stances on morals. His thought process ONLY focuses on opposing Conservative thinking, no matter how barbaric it may seem. People, this candidate is exactly what this country DOESN'T need.

[line-em-up]

Hookem is a crazy motherfucker?
Hookem sucks his mamma's titty?
Hookem has sex with boys in church?

[Vertnut]

I'm surprised at everyone just trying to take shots at someone posting information, rather than the information that is posted (especially in THIS thread)!

Has anyone actually read this shit?!?! Obama is as extreme left as it comes. He doesn't base his stances on morals. His thought process ONLY focuses on opposing Conservative thinking, no matter how barbaric it may seem. People, this candidate is exactly what this country DOESN'T need.
It's much easier to attack the messenger, especially when there is no defense for what is being posted.
Remember though, it's the "Brother-man Travelin' Rock Show!" :rolleyes:
He's just white enough so the honkies will accept him, and just black enough to convince black folks that he was "ghetto" before he was rich. :cool:

Truth is, he is the MOST LIBERAL senator in D.C., bar none.

[gpamp]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml

CBS News adequate?

He voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive. He supported allowing retired police officers to carry concealed weapons, but opposed allowing people to use banned handguns to defend against intruders in their homes. And the list of sensitive topics goes on.
EXACTLY what I thought.

Number one: "...fetuses who survive..." That doesn't mean, that if the baby's born anyway, they string them up like a black guy on John McCain's lawn. It means, that if the abortion doesn't take, they'll try it again. Now, of course, if you don't believe in abortion, then you had a problem with it, to begin with. But to call it "infanticide" is a stretch, since the word "infant" is in there. I don't care how many articles you read that are anti-abortion, no real scientist will call a fetus an "infant". So, by saying Obama supported infanticide, you are, in fact, a liar.

Number two: You omitted (conveniently, I might add) this: Obama — who joined several other Democrats in voting "present" in 2001 and "no" the next year — argued the legislation was worded in a way that unconstitutionally threatened a woman's right to abortion by defining the fetus as a child.

"It would essentially bar abortions because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this was a child then this would be an anti-abortion statute," Obama said in the Senate's debate in March 2001.

See? I told you. The way the bill was worded, changed the definition of a fetus, so that it would be more possible to make abortions illegal. And while abortion is a whole different argument, you, sir, are a liar.

OBAMA SUPPORTED IT:

During his 2004 run for U.S. Senate, Obama said he supported similar federal legislation that included language clarifying that the measure did not interfere with abortion rights.

Thanks for posting the link. You shouldn't have.

[Denny]

Obama supports infanticide. Obama supports all forms of abortion, including partial birth abortions. Obama needs to be aborted.

[gpamp]

Obama supports infanticide. Obama supports all forms of abortion, including partial birth abortions. Obama needs to be aborted.
Infanticide? Really? I didn't see ANYTHING that said anything about killing a baby once it's born (infant).

That's as extreme as me saying John McCain hangs people on his lawn (which I don't really believe), because he voted against Martin Luther King Day.

[Stevo]

It's much easier to attack the messenger, especially when there is no defense for what is being posted.


Hear Here!!!

Stevo

[gpamp]

Hear Here!!!

Stevo
Um... there's a defense.

You should read a little lower down the thread first, before posting.

[HookEm]

No, it's an excuse to justify allowing newborns to die at the mighty altar of abortion rights. Your position is indefensible.

Um... there's a defense.

You should read a little lower down the thread first, before posting.

[slow06]

EXACTLY what I thought.

Number one: "...fetuses who survive..." That doesn't mean, that if the baby's born anyway, they string them up like a black guy on John McCain's lawn. It means, that if the abortion doesn't take, they'll try it again. Now, of course, if you don't believe in abortion, then you had a problem with it, to begin with. But to call it "infanticide" is a stretch, since the word "infant" is in there. I don't care how many articles you read that are anti-abortion, no real scientist will call a fetus an "infant". So, by saying Obama supported infanticide, you are, in fact, a liar.


gpamp, help me out here, I'm confused.

If you try to abort a baby and it survives, why would you need a law to say you can try to abort it again before it is born? Wouldn't that fall under the same realm as the first try? Is there a law that says you can only try an abortion once?

[HookEm]

gpamp, help me out here, I'm confused.

If you try to abort a baby and it survives, why would you need a law to say you can try to abort it again before it is born? Wouldn't that fall under the same realm as the first try? Is there a law that says you can only try an abortion once?



Fetuses who survives=A live baby.
Hence, Obama supports infanticide.

[slow06]

Fetuses who survives=A live baby.
Hence, Obama supports infanticide.

Well yeah, thats what I was thinking, but it seems like gpamp thinks they are talking about it still being in the womb.

That doesn't mean, that if the baby's born anyway, they string them up like a black guy on John McCain's lawn. It means, that if the abortion doesn't take, they'll try it again.

Aside from the backhanded shot at McCain, he did say that pretty clearly here.

But gpamp, my original question still stands. Why the need for a law to do the exact same thing twice?

[Denny]

Infanticide? Really? I didn't see ANYTHING that said anything about killing a baby once it's born (infant).

That's as extreme as me saying John McCain hangs people on his lawn (which I don't really believe), because he voted against Martin Luther King Day.
No, because killing a baby is killing a baby, as opposed to voting against making a time of reflection turned into another day to not getting mail and being racist (or killing people of other races, in your case).

[Slowhand]

I'm just trying to keep track of all the members who are making the school from which I earn my MBA, look like a joke. So far there's Bones, Runninhorn, whoever that douchebag in the sports forum was before he got ran off, the guy who posts an Obama thread every two seconds...

I hate to break it to you, but that's just most Texas fans. You'll never get away from it. :p

[Stevo]

Um... there's a defense.

You should read a little lower down the thread first, before posting.

Doesn't matter how slowly anyone reads your drivel, the content doesn't change, and is still drivel.

Stevo

[gpamp]

No, it's an excuse to justify allowing newborns to die at the mighty altar of abortion rights. Your position is indefensible.
So, you're ignoring my argument, entirely? Even though it makes 14,653 times more sense than your flaming posts that come from nowhere?

You don't understand that newborns are not dying because of this, do you? The bill was created for the sole purpose of calling "fetuses" "babies", so that it would be easier to outlaw abortions. NO ONE was, or is, killing newborn babies.

Seriously, I can't believe that you post stuff like this, that is so freakishly outrageous, but when I post a satirical thread about John McCain being a racist, everyone flips the hell out.

You're full of shit, HookEm. No argument from me, or yourself can change that.

[gpamp]

gpamp, help me out here, I'm confused.

If you try to abort a baby and it survives, why would you need a law to say you can try to abort it again before it is born? Wouldn't that fall under the same realm as the first try? Is there a law that says you can only try an abortion once?
The point is, the bill had no point. It was created (and I'm saying this again) for the sole purpose of sneaking in new wording for "fetus" so that abortion can be, someday, outlawed, using this new word. No one was killing newborn babies. It's not like abortions were failing, and the doctors were just waiting for that 9 months to be up so they could shred that baby when he came out. It's a fantastical idea, that HookEm bought into.

It was the same thing with the Patriot act. They named it "the Patriot act", even though it really had nothing to do with patriotism. But all those who voted against it, citing privacy issues for innocent Americans, could be pointed at by critics, who can say "they voted against the Patriot act!!"

[gpamp]

Fetuses who survives=A live baby.
Hence, Obama supports infanticide.
You're an alcoholic and you drive = A drunk driver.
You kill thousands of people per year.

I like your logic.

[gpamp]

Doesn't matter how slowly anyone reads your drivel, the content doesn't change, and is still drivel.

Stevo
Oh man, you won that argument. Way to sidestep.

[slow06]

The point is, the bill had no point. It was created (and I'm saying this again) for the sole purpose of sneaking in new wording for "fetus" so that abortion can be, someday, outlawed, using this new word. No one was killing newborn babies. It's not like abortions were failing, and the doctors were just waiting for that 9 months to be up so they could shred that baby when he came out. It's a fantastical idea, that HookEm bought into.

It was the same thing with the Patriot act. They named it "the Patriot act", even though it really had nothing to do with patriotism. But all those who voted against it, citing privacy issues for innocent Americans, could be pointed at by critics, who can say "they voted against the Patriot act!!"

I don't care about the Patriot Act, nor do I care what their "Agenda" is, I just wanted clarification. You two are arguing because HookEm though they were killing babies that had been born. They aren't, so that should end this. Unless we want to have the old abortion debate again....yawn.

[Stevo]

Oh man, you won that argument. Way to sidestep.

Oh, I'm sorry, I wasn't aware we were arguing, considering there wasn't anything to argue. He made a post, you made your general attacks on the OP, it was noted by someone else that you had no other response but to attack the first guy, I agreed, then you attacked me, I countered, and then you post this.

We are all aware that Obama is your great hope, but you MUST come up with better arguments than this drivel. Try harder, I'm sure if you really apply yourself, you will find better mud to sling and better defenses to aid your daddy Obama.

Stevo

[HookEm]

The BAIPA mandates medical care for aborted babies that survive. Testimony from nurses indicates that those that survived the procedure were left to die, prior to the passing of this act, so I ahve to whole heartedly disagree.



I don't care about the Patriot Act, nor do I care what their "Agenda" is, I just wanted clarification. You two are arguing because HookEm though they were killing babies that had been born. They aren't, so that should end this. Unless we want to have the old abortion debate again....yawn.

[slow06]

The BAIPA mandates medical care for aborted babies that survive. Testimony from nurses indicates that those that survived the procedure were left to die, prior to the passing of this act, so I ahve to whole heartedly disagree.

Well shit I don't know which one of you is telling the truth. Personally I think either way you are killing a child and that is bullshit.

[HookEm]

Well shit I don't know which one of you is telling the truth. Personally I think either way you are killing a child and that is bullshit.


http://www.nrlc.org/federal/born_alive_infants/Baipatext.pdf

[Zarathustra]

Fetuses who survives=A live baby.
Hence, Obama supports infanticide.

Following your line of reasoning and that of you ilk sir, the baby is alive at conception and nothing is different after it travels through the birth canal.

[HookEm]

Following your line of reasoning and that of you ilk sir, the baby is alive at conception and nothing is different after it travels through the birth canal.


Please spread your kernels of knowledge with a far greater frequency!

[Zarathustra]

i figured you'd circumvent another one of my arguments.

good job.

FAIL, again.

[HookEm]

i figured you'd circumvent another one of my arguments.

good job.

FAIL, again.



http://images.icanhascheezburger.com/completestore/2008/4/7/icanhazdeath128520943351718750.jpg

[gpamp]

This just in:

John McCain said it's ok to have an abortion, as long as the baby is black.

President Bush asked "How do you know if they're black?"

[Stevo]

This just in:

John McCain said it's ok to have an abortion, as long as the baby is black.

President Bush asked "How do you know if they're black?"

I figured you would be totally against abortion, because it would mean more children you could molest. Go figure.

Stevo

[flashstang04]

I'm surprised at everyone just trying to take shots at someone posting information, rather than the information that is posted (especially in THIS thread)!

Has anyone actually read this shit?!?! Obama is as extreme left as it comes. He doesn't base his stances on morals. His thought process ONLY focuses on opposing Conservative thinking, no matter how barbaric it may seem. People, this candidate is exactly what this country DOESN'T need.


Probably the sanest post in here...

[gpamp]

I figured you would be totally against abortion, because it would mean more children you could molest. Go figure.

Stevo
Wow. You're calling me a child molester? Where'd that come from?

Sick fuck.

[Sean88gt]

Wow. You're calling me a child molester? Where'd that come from?

Sick fuck.

Didn't you brag upon first registering about your Christian beliefs?

[gpamp]

Didn't you brag upon first registering about your Christian beliefs?
(See, the point of me posting that was for 90's sake.)

And I'm not sure I "bragged about my Christian beliefs". I have some knowledge of the Bible, because I majored in Theology at a Bible College. And I do love the Lord. But I don't know that I "brag" about it.

[HookEm]

Didn't you brag upon first registering about your Christian beliefs?



It was just the herb talking, mon.

[gpamp]

It was just the herb talking, mon.
haha, no. I found Jesus beFORE I hit rock bottom. That's another way to do it, you may not have heard of.

[HookEm]

You love the Lord, yet support PArtial Birth Abortion to the point of infanticide? (Even without the infanticde disclaimer....pretty messed up.)
For be it for me to judge the window of a man's soul, but that seems as if it flies in the face of the whole "Thou shalt not kill"....




(See, the point of me posting that was for 90's sake.)

And I'm not sure I "bragged about my Christian beliefs". I have some knowledge of the Bible, because I majored in Theology at a Bible College. And I do love the Lord. But I don't know that I "brag" about it.

[HookEm]

haha, no. I found Jesus beFORE I hit rock bottom. That's another way to do it, you may not have heard of.


Yet, you support PBA/infanticide.


Weird.

[gpamp]

You love the Lord, yet support PArtial Birth Abortion to the point of infanticide? (Even without the infanticde disclaimer....pretty messed up.)
For be it for me to judge the window of a man's soul, but that seems as if it flies in the face of the whole "Thou shalt not kill"....
First, educate yourself as to what it is:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5168163

I'm guessing you're picturing some girl with a big scarlet "A" on her blouse, going into an abortion clinic, 9 months pregnant, and letting the Dr. deliver the baby, just enough, so they can kill it.

Think, man. Think. Number one, I don't care HOW unwanted a pregnancy is, a woman is NOT going to carry a baby for that long, and not go ahead and deliver it. Usually, an "unwanted pregnancy" is an "unwanted pregnancy", hence the nifty title. So, using that logic (logic is... nevermind), there probably has to be a reason that a "partial birth abortion" exists. Note the fact that "partial birth abortion" is not an accurate title (read the article).

This is the procedure they use for saving a mother's life sometimes. If the Dr. sees that delivering this baby will KILL the mother, then they will perform this.

I haven't read the percentage in quite some time, but last I did, I think "partial birth abortions" accounted for less than 1% of all abortions.

Think beyond what is written by your far-right websites. Once.

[gpamp]

Yet, you support PBA/infanticide.


Weird.
Again...

You claim to love the Lord, but you and your ilk have killed thousands of people, annually.

[Sean88gt]

As a parent, I'd give my life for that of my children. Not stick a shop vac in the back of the skull. There are things like c-sections if you don't want the kid and it took that long to decide.

[HookEm]

Again...

You claim to love the Lord, but you and your ilk have killed thousands of people, annually.


I've never killed a soul. Maybe I should flip out like you after you were "falsely" accused of using dope, and show my ass for all to see.

[gpamp]

As a parent, I'd give my life for that of my children. Not stick a shop vac in the back of the skull. There are things like c-sections if you don't want the kid and it took that long to decide.
Dude, no one takes that long, then decides they don't want it, unless they're planning to give it up for adoption. Hence, my point.

[HookEm]

And if the baby comes out alive, you advocate its murder via not providing basic medical care, no?


First, educate yourself as to what it is:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5168163

I'm guessing you're picturing some girl with a big scarlet "A" on her blouse, going into an abortion clinic, 9 months pregnant, and letting the Dr. deliver the baby, just enough, so they can kill it.

Think, man. Think. Number one, I don't care HOW unwanted a pregnancy is, a woman is NOT going to carry a baby for that long, and not go ahead and deliver it. Usually, an "unwanted pregnancy" is an "unwanted pregnancy", hence the nifty title. So, using that logic (logic is... nevermind), there probably has to be a reason that a "partial birth abortion" exists. Note the fact that "partial birth abortion" is not an accurate title (read the article).

This is the procedure they use for saving a mother's life sometimes. If the Dr. sees that delivering this baby will KILL the mother, then they will perform this.

I haven't read the percentage in quite some time, but last I did, I think "partial birth abortions" accounted for less than 1% of all abortions.

Think beyond what is written by your far-right websites. Once.

[That_Is_My_El_Camino]

LOLz @ "ilk," twice on the same page by the only two guys arguing the losing side.

[gpamp]

I've never killed a soul. Maybe I should flip out like you after you were "falsely" accused of using dope, and show my ass for all to see.
Why?

I used your logic, remember?

You're an alcoholic. And you drive. = You're a drunk driver.
Drunk drivers kill thousands of people per year.
You kill thousands of people per year.

See, I KNOW it's not true. But if I had your sense of anything-to-make-my-point-true logic, then I might actually believe you kill people.

[Sean88gt]

I've never killed a soul. Maybe I should flip out like you after you were "falsely" accused of using dope, and show my ass for all to see.
Not even when a deal went bad?;)

[Sean88gt]

Dude, no one takes that long, then decides they don't want it, unless they're planning to give it up for adoption. Hence, my point.

Kind of like the whores that have kids and then stick in the trash can?

I win!

[HookEm]

Not even when a deal went bad?;)


I only bought on Singleton with the Messicans....no bad deals there!

:p

[HookEm]

So, who is this "ilk" you speak of?


Why?

I used your logic, remember?

You're an alcoholic. And you drive. = You're a drunk driver.
Drunk drivers kill thousands of people per year.
You kill thousands of people per year.

See, I KNOW it's not true. But if I had your sense of anything-to-make-my-point-true logic, then I might actually believe you kill people.

[gpamp]

And if the baby comes out alive, you advocate its murder via not providing basic medical care, no?
You STILL believe that's the case, don't you?

No matter how many times on this page it's been proven not the case. No matter that the article that you, yourself, posted said that it was voted against because the bill was trying to slip unconstitutional words in, but then later voted FOR when it was made to be just that, you STILL believe that?

This kind of stuff NEVER HAPPENS.

So... when the Dems were trying to slip pull-out dates in the bills that were funding the troops, and the Republicans voted against it... you believe that the Republicans in Congress support not funding the troops?

Same damn thing, only there are actually troops that need the money!

No one is birthing babies and letting them die in a doctor's office.

Don't you think that'd be a bigger story? I realize you think the "Liberal Media" is out to get you, but seriously. I think there'd be a bit of a public outcry.

[gpamp]

So, who is this "ilk" you speak of?
Reading comprehension would tell you that the "ilk" was "other drunk drivers".

[Sean88gt]

I only bought on Singleton with the Messicans....no bad deals there!

:p
They put bad mojo in it.

[HookEm]

Reading comprehension would tell you that the "ilk" was "other drunk drivers".
MEanwhile, your ilk kills millions.

Whether its the Darwinists of the Third Reich, or the Darwinists of the abortion holocaust.....

millions and millions being killed.

[gpamp]

MEanwhile, your ilk kills millions.

Whether its the Darwinists of the Third Reich, or the Darwinists of the abortion holocaust.....

millions and millions being killed.
My child is an honor student at...

Oh. Sorry. Thought this was the bumper sticker thread.

[HookEm]

This was in a 2 minute search. You were saying?


“I don't recall mentioning religion when I testified against live-birth abortion. I only recall describing a live aborted baby I held in a hospital soiled utility room until he died, and a live aborted baby who was accidentally thrown into the trash,”

http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=26868

Fetus' age key to possible charges against Hialeah abortion clinic

Prosecutors looking into the case of a Hialeah abortion clinic where a baby was born alive are weighing whether to file criminal charges.

BY SUSANNAH A. NESMITH, DAVID OVALLE AND JACOB GOLDSTEIN

snesmith@MiamiHerald.com (snesmith@MiamiHerald.com)

<!-- begin body-content --><
When witnesses told police a baby was born alive and later died at a Hialeah abortion clinic, Miami-Dade prosecutors found themselves trying to determine when a fetus becomes a viable baby.

If the fetus found at the clinic was at 22 weeks of gestation, as the Miami-Dade Medical Examiner believes, healthcare experts say the decision is a fairly easy one. The fetus wasn't viable.

Assistant State Attorney Kathleen Hoague said her office is still gathering evidence in the case, including two sonograms done on the mother before the baby was born.

''There are lots of questions that medically I don't have the answer to yet,'' Hoague said. ``You're talking about a fetus that could be aborted legally.''

A witness told police that someone at the clinic put the baby on the roof of the building when police first searched for it, casting suspicion on the whole incident.

''They hid the body from us for eight days,'' Hialeah police Deputy Chief Mark Overton said.

Hialeah police are pushing for indictments. They say the clinic staff should have called 911 and sent the baby -- a girl -- to the hospital.

''This has to be a homicide, an unlawful killing. It could be manslaughter, but we believe it falls in that realm,'' Overton said.

http://www.mjsite.com/cache/92784




You STILL believe that's the case, don't you?

No matter how many times on this page it's been proven not the case. No matter that the article that you, yourself, posted said that it was voted against because the bill was trying to slip unconstitutional words in, but then later voted FOR when it was made to be just that, you STILL believe that?

This kind of stuff NEVER HAPPENS.

So... when the Dems were trying to slip pull-out dates in the bills that were funding the troops, and the Republicans voted against it... you believe that the Republicans in Congress support not funding the troops?

Same damn thing, only there are actually troops that need the money!

No one is birthing babies and letting them die in a doctor's office.

Don't you think that'd be a bigger story? I realize you think the "Liberal Media" is out to get you, but seriously. I think there'd be a bit of a public outcry.

[Denny]

I'm still trying to figure out why people are thinking that Christians hold some sort of "Holier than thou" attitude. As a Christian, I recognize that I am in the wrong more times than not. I have lied, cheated, stolen, killed, thrown down some serious blasphemy, idolized, misspelled, wiped boogers under a seat... you name it. The only difference is that I know that I am what I am and I've made my choice to accept the Ultimate Sacrifice so I can be forgiven and TRY to live my life the way He wants me to. Hopefully someday, I'll be the model Christian I should be. Sometimes, my raw emotion takes over and wrong decisions are made. Either way, I own up to them to the only One that matters.

The point I'm getting at is that Christians are just as flawwed as anyone else. Nothing gives them a right to go into the finger pointing game, unless it's to help others recognize their need for Christ. Don't make this a Christian vs. Heathen argument. All this is about whether or not killing unborn babies is right.

[67camino]

You STILL believe that's the case, don't you?

No matter how many times on this page it's been proven not the case. No matter that the article that you, yourself, posted said that it was voted against because the bill was trying to slip unconstitutional words in, but then later voted FOR when it was made to be just that, you STILL believe that?

This kind of stuff NEVER HAPPENS.

So... when the Dems were trying to slip pull-out dates in the bills that were funding the troops, and the Republicans voted against it... you believe that the Republicans in Congress support not funding the troops?

Same damn thing, only there are actually troops that need the money!

No one is birthing babies and letting them die in a doctor's office.

Don't you think that'd be a bigger story? I realize you think the "Liberal Media" is out to get you, but seriously. I think there'd be a bit of a public outcry.
Do you even know what a partial birth abortion is???

[Vertnut]

I'm still trying to figure out why people are thinking that Christians hold some sort of "Holier than thou" attitude. As a Christian, I recognize that I am in the wrong more times than not. I have lied, cheated, stolen, killed, thrown down some serious blasphemy, idolized, misspelled, wiped boogers under a seat... you name it. The only difference is that I know that I am what I am and I've made my choice to accept the Ultimate Sacrifice so I can be forgiven and TRY to live my life the way He wants me to. Hopefully someday, I'll be the model Christian I should be. Sometimes, my raw emotion takes over and wrong decisions are made. Either way, I own up to them to the only One that matters.

The point I'm getting at is that Christians are just as flawwed as anyone else. Nothing gives them a right to go into the finger pointing game, unless it's to help others recognize their need for Christ. Don't make this a Christian vs. Heathen argument. All this is about whether or not killing unborn babies is right.
As is the case with most arguments in this forum, it's easier to attack one's ideology or religion, than it is to address the issue. I'm sure there are agnostic's and atheists' who are against abortion, just because it's wrong, without delving into the religious ramifications. But, because this opinion is typically held by the "religious right", that's what comes to the forefront, instead of the issue at hand...Hence the "holier than thou" perception some folks have of Christians.

[Sean88gt]

I'm still trying to figure out why people are thinking that Christians hold some sort of "Holier than thou" attitude. As a Christian, I recognize that I am in the wrong more times than not. I have lied, cheated, stolen, killed, thrown down some serious blasphemy, idolized, misspelled, wiped boogers under a seat... you name it. The only difference is that I know that I am what I am and I've made my choice to accept the Ultimate Sacrifice so I can be forgiven and TRY to live my life the way He wants me to. Hopefully someday, I'll be the model Christian I should be. Sometimes, my raw emotion takes over and wrong decisions are made. Either way, I own up to them to the only One that matters.

The point I'm getting at is that Christians are just as flawwed as anyone else. Nothing gives them a right to go into the finger pointing game, unless it's to help others recognize their need for Christ. Don't make this a Christian vs. Heathen argument. All this is about whether or not killing unborn babies is right.

I'm in the same boat Denny. I was trying to take it to school yard level ;)
The one thing that seems to unify most Christians though is that life begins at conception and abortion is murder. I just find it odd that gpamp has liberal'd up Christ.

[slow06]

HookEm and gpamp: SHUT UP

Guess what? You aren’t going to change each other’s mind!

Either talk about the issue at hand or go start a thread in the smack where you can decide who is the better Christian. One did dope, the other is a drunk driver bla bla bla. What does that have to do with partial birth abortions?

Back to the issue at hand:
Someone explain it to me because I must be slow, it looks like gpamps NPR article says they deliver and kill it…right?

...from knowingly performing a "partial-birth abortion," a procedure it defines as one in which the person performing the abortion "deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother."

[Sean88gt]

Kind of like the whores that have kids and then stick in the trash can?

I win!

Gpamp, I posted this last night in response to you saying that no women would go that long and decide she didn't want the baby.

Just because the truth sometimes sucks doesn't make it untrue.

[gpamp]

HookEm and gpamp: SHUT UP

Guess what? You aren’t going to change each other’s mind!

Either talk about the issue at hand or go start a thread in the smack where you can decide who is the better Christian. One did dope, the other is a drunk driver bla bla bla. What does that have to do with partial birth abortions?

Back to the issue at hand:
Someone explain it to me because I must be slow, it looks like gpamps NPR article says they deliver and kill it…right?
No. Read it again.

A Republican representative from FL, named Charles Canady was the first to call it "partial birth abortion". Not a Doctor.

And no, the baby is not born, then killed.

The procedure is for people who are more than 20 weeks along in a pregnancy. It's not even performed that much. And the only reason you see most people turning down bills to make it illegal, is because the way they word it, it could make all abortions illegal. It's, again, the same thing as when the Dems in congress tried to put a pull-out date for the troops, in with the money they needed. So, when all the Republicans wouldn't sign the bill, it looked like the Republicans didn't want to fund the troops. (that's a repeat)

From the article:
According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, an abortion-rights research group that conducts surveys of the nation's abortion doctors, about 15,000 abortions were performed in the year 2000 on women 20 weeks or more along in their pregnancies; the vast majority were between the 20th and 24th week. Of those, only about 2,200 D&X ("partial birth") abortions were performed, or about 0.2 percent of the 1.3 million abortions believed to be performed that year.

And contrary to the claims of some abortion opponents, most such abortions do not take place in the third trimester of pregnancy, or after fetal "viability." Indeed, when some members of Congress tried to amend the bill to ban only those procedures that take place after viability, abortion opponents complained that would leave most of the procedures legal.

The only reason the Republican Politician calls it "partial birth abortion" is because it's used for abortions that are further along than usual abortions, and sometimes the health of the woman can't take everything that happens inside, during a normal abortion. The fetus is terminated, then extracted fully intact (probably the reason the representative put the "birth" part in there).

The article admits that there's no study as to why it's performed, or why some women wait so long, but offers:
Yet the procedure is also performed in cases where the woman's health is at risk, or when the fetus shows signs of serious abnormalities, some of which don't become apparent until late in pregnancy.

So, with all of this, HookEm, throwing around "infanticide", just sounds unlearned.

[Denny]

You truely don't know what a partial birth abortion is.

[gpamp]

This was in a 2 minute search. You were saying?


“I don't recall mentioning religion when I testified against live-birth abortion. I only recall describing a live aborted baby I held in a hospital soiled utility room until he died, and a live aborted baby who was accidentally thrown into the trash,”

http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=26868

Fetus' age key to possible charges against Hialeah abortion clinic

Prosecutors looking into the case of a Hialeah abortion clinic where a baby was born alive are weighing whether to file criminal charges.

BY SUSANNAH A. NESMITH, DAVID OVALLE AND JACOB GOLDSTEIN

snesmith@MiamiHerald.com (snesmith@MiamiHerald.com)

<!-- begin body-content --><
When witnesses told police a baby was born alive and later died at a Hialeah abortion clinic, Miami-Dade prosecutors found themselves trying to determine when a fetus becomes a viable baby.

If the fetus found at the clinic was at 22 weeks of gestation, as the Miami-Dade Medical Examiner believes, healthcare experts say the decision is a fairly easy one. The fetus wasn't viable.

Assistant State Attorney Kathleen Hoague said her office is still gathering evidence in the case, including two sonograms done on the mother before the baby was born.

''There are lots of questions that medically I don't have the answer to yet,'' Hoague said. ``You're talking about a fetus that could be aborted legally.''

A witness told police that someone at the clinic put the baby on the roof of the building when police first searched for it, casting suspicion on the whole incident.

''They hid the body from us for eight days,'' Hialeah police Deputy Chief Mark Overton said.

Hialeah police are pushing for indictments. They say the clinic staff should have called 911 and sent the baby -- a girl -- to the hospital.

''This has to be a homicide, an unlawful killing. It could be manslaughter, but we believe it falls in that realm,'' Overton said.

http://www.mjsite.com/cache/92784

So, you're basing all of this on one story? One news story? So, I could say that JFK, Jr. crashes in a plane all the time? Or Charlton Heston is dying every day?

Wow. The story you posted has NOTHING to do with the bill that was signed, number one. And we've ALREADY gone over and over with the fact that the bill was filled with catch 22s. Just like when the Dems slid in a pull-out date, to the bill that would give the troops the money they needed. When the Reps wouldn't sign it, it made it seem, if you didn't know any better, that the Republicans didn't support giving money to the troops. (I figure if I post that enough, it'll sink in)

Is ignorance REALLY that blissful?

[gpamp]

Do you even know what a partial birth abortion is???
I've posted an answer to this, already. Your multiple "???" lets me know that you THINK you know what it is. Read that article.

[67camino]

In September, 1993, Brenda Pratt Shafer, a registered nurse with thirteen years or experience, was assigned by her nursing agency to an abortion clinic. Since Nurse Shafer considered herself "very pro-choice," she didn't think this assignment would be a problem. She was wrong. This is what Nurse Shafer saw:

" I stood at the doctor's side and watched him perform a partial-birth abortion on a woman who was six months pregnant. The baby's heartbeat was clearly visible on the ultrasound screen. The doctor delivered the baby's body and arms, everything but his little head. The baby's body was moving. His little fingers were clasping together. He was kicking his feet. The doctor took a pair of scissors and inserted them into the back of the baby's head, and the baby's arms jerked out in a flinch, a startle reaction, like a baby does when he thinks that he might fall. Then the doctor opened the scissors up. Then he stuck the high-powered suction tube into the hole and sucked the baby's brains out. Now the baby was completely limp. I never went back to the clinic. But I am still haunted by the face of that little boy. It was the most perfect, angelic face I have ever seen." Sounds like a partial "birth" to me afterall the baby made it more than half-way out the "birth" canal.

[gpamp]

Gpamp, I posted this last night in response to you saying that no women would go that long and decide she didn't want the baby.

Just because the truth sometimes sucks doesn't make it untrue.
You're right, on a technicality. But those women, as well as the ones that jam coat hangers up inside them, are always going to be abnormalities in discussions like this. That's irrational either way you look at it, because an intelligent person would know that you can dump a baby off at a fire station, legally, under the Baby Moses Law.

There's always exceptions that don't make the rule.

[gpamp]

In September, 1993, Brenda Pratt Shafer, a registered nurse with thirteen years or experience, was assigned by her nursing agency to an abortion clinic. Since Nurse Shafer considered herself "very pro-choice," she didn't think this assignment would be a problem. She was wrong. This is what Nurse Shafer saw:

" I stood at the doctor's side and watched him perform a partial-birth abortion on a woman who was six months pregnant. The baby's heartbeat was clearly visible on the ultrasound screen. The doctor delivered the baby's body and arms, everything but his little head. The baby's body was moving. His little fingers were clasping together. He was kicking his feet. The doctor took a pair of scissors and inserted them into the back of the baby's head, and the baby's arms jerked out in a flinch, a startle reaction, like a baby does when he thinks that he might fall. Then the doctor opened the scissors up. Then he stuck the high-powered suction tube into the hole and sucked the baby's brains out. Now the baby was completely limp. I never went back to the clinic. But I am still haunted by the face of that little boy. It was the most perfect, angelic face I have ever seen." Sounds like a partial "birth" to me afterall the baby made it more than half-way out the "birth" canal.
There it is!

I was wondering where the fake story was. This is the fake story where most people get their misinformed views of the definition of "partial birth abortion". It was a Myspace message for a while. It's one of the many e-mails that someone has made up. I notice you didn't put a source.

[gpamp]

You truely don't know what a partial birth abortion is.
I actually, think I do. I also know what it is not.

[67camino]

There it is!

I was wondering where the fake story was. This is the fake story where most people get their misinformed views of the definition of "partial birth abortion". It was a Myspace message for a while. It's one of the many e-mails that someone has made up. I notice you didn't put a source.
Yeah you caught me I made this shit up. Your are on sick fuck if you dont think this has happen. Go smoke somemore dope sick fuck.

[blownragtop]

First, educate yourself as to what it is:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5168163

I'm guessing you're picturing some girl with a big scarlet "A" on her blouse, going into an abortion clinic, 9 months pregnant, and letting the Dr. deliver the baby, just enough, so they can kill it.

Think, man. Think. Number one, I don't care HOW unwanted a pregnancy is, a woman is NOT going to carry a baby for that long, and not go ahead and deliver it. Usually, an "unwanted pregnancy" is an "unwanted pregnancy", hence the nifty title. So, using that logic (logic is... nevermind), there probably has to be a reason that a "partial birth abortion" exists. Note the fact that "partial birth abortion" is not an accurate title (read the article).

This is the procedure they use for saving a mother's life sometimes. If the Dr. sees that delivering this baby will KILL the mother, then they will perform this.

I haven't read the percentage in quite some time, but last I did, I think "partial birth abortions" accounted for less than 1% of all abortions.

Think beyond what is written by your far-right websites. Once.

Did you YOU even bother to read the link that YOU POSTED?

Two abortion physicians, one in Ohio and one in California, independently developed variations on the method by extracting the fetus intact. The Ohio physician, Martin Haskell, called his method "dilation and extraction," or D&X. It involved dilating the woman's cervix, then pulling the fetus through it feet first until only the head remained inside. Using scissors or another sharp instrument, the head was then punctured, and the skull compressed, so it, too, could fit through the dilated cervix.

Haskell has said that he devised his D&X procedure because he wanted to find a way to perform second-trimester abortions without an overnight hospital stay, because local hospitals did not permit most abortions after 18 weeks.

In a widely-publicized interview with The New York Times in 1997, Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, estimated that in the majority of cases, the procedure is performed on a healthy mother and healthy fetus that is 20 weeks or more along in development.


It seems readily apparent that Partial Birth Abortions are primarily performed as a matter of convenience for the mother (like almost all abortions) – not because of some medical necessity.

Here’s a picture of a ‘FETUS’ that was delivered at 21 weeks. Could you please tell us at what point after delivery did she become an ‘INFANT’?
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h287/spridle67/amilia2Btaylor1.jpg

[HookEm]

I dont think anyone's debating who's a better Christian. My point was that murder flies in the face of some pretty basic tenets of Scripture. Woudl you argue agaisnt that?

If you can't see the corelation between PBA and murder, and the hypocrisy involved in wrapping oneself in the Word.......

And while I am a drunk, a drunk driver I was not. I think you missed a lot of his (Extremely veiled) point while trying to decipher the rhetoric.






HookEm and gpamp: SHUT UP

Guess what? You aren’t going to change each other’s mind!

Either talk about the issue at hand or go start a thread in the smack where you can decide who is the better Christian. One did dope, the other is a drunk driver bla bla bla. What does that have to do with partial birth abortions?

Back to the issue at hand:
Someone explain it to me because I must be slow, it looks like gpamps NPR article says they deliver and kill it…right?

[67camino]

What is Partial-Birth Abortion?
Partial-Birth Abortion is a procedure in which the abortionist pulls a living baby feet-first out of the womb and into the birth canal (vagina), except for the head, which the abortionist purposely keeps lodged just inside the cervix (the opening to the womb). The abortionist punctures the base of the baby’s skull with a surgical instrument, such as a long surgical scissors or a pointed hollow metal tube called a trochar. He then inserts a catheter (tube) into the wound, and removes the baby's brain with a powerful suction machine. This causes the skull to collapse, after which the abortionist completes the delivery of the now-dead baby.
Source: NRLC.ORG

[Denny]

I actually, think I do. I also know what it is not.
Obviously, you don't which is why I have a problem even arguing the subject with you. All that aside, I don't think it should even be argued at that level. Even your definition is too extreme for me. Life is life. Decisions were already made at conception. I can fold to the whole rape, child's/mother's quality of life exeptions, but that's about it. It should be done as soon as medically possible in those cases or the specific case is overturned. Anything else should be followed up with homicide charges... at least. hell, justifialbe shootings are sent to a grand jury, no matter how obvious it is.

[HookEm]

http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/images/lilpba1.gifhttp://www.nrlc.org/abortion/images/lilpba2.gifhttp://www.nrlc.org/abortion/images/lilpba3.gifhttp://www.nrlc.org/abortion/images/lilpba4.gif
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/images/lilpba5.gif
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/PBA_Images/Pba15.jpg (http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/PBA_Images/PBA1.BMP)http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/PBA_Images/Pba25.jpg (http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/PBA_Images/PBA2.BMP)http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/PBA_Images/Pba35.jpg (http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/PBA_Images/PBA3.BMP)http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/PBA_Images/Pba45.jpg (http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/PBA_Images/PBA4.BMP)http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/PBA_Images/Pba55.jpg (http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/PBA_Images/PBA5.BMP)
Anthony P. Levatino, M.D., J.D.

5406 Remington Rd.

Las Cruces, N.M. 88011

March 4, 2003

Mr. Douglas Johnson

Legislative Director

National Right to Life

S12-10th Street Northwest

Washington, DC 20004

Mr. Johnson:

I am a board-certified obstetrician/gynecologist and a Fellow of the American

College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. I perfomled both first and second trimester

abortions from 1977 until 1985 including D&E abortions up to twenty-two weeks gestation. I was Assistant Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Albany Medical College from June 1993 to September 2000 during which time I served as both Residency Program Director and Medical Student Education Director. I also served as the ACOG District II, Section IX Vice Chaimlan from 1995 unti11998. Currently I am engaged inn the private practice of obstetrics and gynecology in New Mexico. My resume is attached.

The partial-birth abortion illustrations that I have forwarded to you were paintedby Mrs. Tanja Butler who is currently a professor of art at Gordon College in Massachusetts. They were prepared under my supervision and, in my professional judgment, they accurately depict the D&X abortion described by Dr. Martin Haskell in his 1992 paper entitled "Dilation and Extraction for Late Second Trimester Abortion".

This type of late-term abortion later came to be known by the legal term of art "partialbirth abortion" because of its similarity to full-term delivery of infants in breech position.

The images are size-appropriate to a fetus of approximately 24 weeks gestation. This is a typical gestational age for partial-birth abortion although many of these procedures are performed at even later gestational ages.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions

Very truly yours,

~~~

Anthony Levatino, MD, ill

[slow06]

I dont think anyone's debating who's a better Christian. My point was that murder flies in the face of some pretty basic tenets of Scripture. Woudl you argue agaisnt that?

If you can't see the corelation between PBA and murder, and the hypocrisy involved in wrapping oneself in the Word.......

And while I am a drunk, a drunk driver I was not. I think you missed a lot of his (Extremely veiled) point while trying to decipher the rhetoric.

I know you aren't a drunk driver, just like he doesn't smoke dope. I was being extreme so you guys would realize how stupid you sound when you argue back and forth like children. I am not trying to throw your mistakes in your face or judging you for them either. I have my own to fix first

I agree with you on the fact that abortion is murder, no matter when it happens. I believe if you make the choice to have sex you make the choice live with the consequences.

[HookEm]

A healthy dose of your past helps you not to forget it...I actually embrace that now and aain.

You're not offending me, bro,

And I Agree 1000% with your last statement. Dont do it if you dont plan on being a mother/father.

I know you aren't a drunk driver, just like he doesn't smoke dope. I was being extreme so you guys would realize how stupid you sound when you argue back and forth like children. I am not trying to throw your mistakes in your face or judging you for them either. I have my own to fix first

I agree with you on the fact that abortion is murder, no matter when it happens. I believe if you make the choice to have sex you make the choice live with the consequences.

[gpamp]

Yeah you caught me I made this shit up. Your are on sick fuck if you dont think this has happen. Go smoke somemore dope sick fuck.
Didn't say YOU made it up. You just bought into it.

[67camino]

Didn't say YOU made it up. You just bought into it.
Its called sarcasim you dip shit.

[Sean88gt]

You're right, on a technicality. But those women, as well as the ones that jam coat hangers up inside them, are always going to be abnormalities in discussions like this. That's irrational either way you look at it, because an intelligent person would know that you can dump a baby off at a fire station, legally, under the Baby Moses Law.

There's always exceptions that don't make the rule.


Which just goes to show there are even women that are considered decent that will drop a kid off that they don't want after they went full term.

You keep answering the question, but not seeing the conclusions you come up with.

[3.8to5.8]

EXACTLY what I thought.

Number one: "...fetuses who survive..." That doesn't mean, that if the baby's born anyway, they string them up like a black guy on John McCain's lawn. It means, that if the abortion doesn't take, they'll try it again. Now, of course, if you don't believe in abortion, then you had a problem with it, to begin with. But to call it "infanticide" is a stretch, since the word "infant" is in there. I don't care how many articles you read that are anti-abortion, no real scientist will call a fetus an "infant". So, by saying Obama supported infanticide, you are, in fact, a liar.

Number two: You omitted (conveniently, I might add) this: Obama — who joined several other Democrats in voting "present" in 2001 and "no" the next year — argued the legislation was worded in a way that unconstitutionally threatened a woman's right to abortion by defining the fetus as a child.

"It would essentially bar abortions because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this was a child then this would be an anti-abortion statute," Obama said in the Senate's debate in March 2001.

See? I told you. The way the bill was worded, changed the definition of a fetus, so that it would be more possible to make abortions illegal. And while abortion is a whole different argument, you, sir, are a liar.

OBAMA SUPPORTED IT:

During his 2004 run for U.S. Senate, Obama said he supported similar federal legislation that included language clarifying that the measure did not interfere with abortion rights.

Thanks for posting the link. You shouldn't have.


you are a complete idiot hope you fall down a long row a stairs

[gpamp]

you are a complete idiot hope you fall down a long row a stairs
You're MUCH smarter than me, aren't you? Your clear-headed post displays your intellect.

[3.8to5.8]

You're MUCH smarter than me, aren't you? Your clear-headed post displays your intellect.

if you voting for obama i am smarter than you :) fuck off

[Vertnut]

if you voting for obama i am smarter than you :) fuck off
Zing! :D

[Wario]

if you voting for obama i am smarter than you :) fuck off

This is whats on your team right wing? Good luck to ya!

BTW I put as much stock in the word "infanticide" as I do the term "Intelligent design."

[HookEm]

This is whats on your team right wing? Good luck to ya!

BTW I put as much stock in the word "infanticide" as I do the term "Intelligent design."



Just because you dont believe in it....


doesnt mean it doesnt exist

[KiwiGT]

Just because you dont believe in it....


doesnt mean it doesnt exist

Just because you do, doesn't mean it does.

You know, there's a WHOLE LOT I could say on this subject. While I am pro-life for MYSELF, I am not so arrogant or pig headed as to say my moral compass should be what dictates someone elses actions.

So, I'll sit this one out.

If you're really going to start debating ethics, I think the Political forum is the last place it should be done.

[slow06]

Just because you do, doesn't mean it does.

You know, there's a WHOLE LOT I could say on this subject. While I am pro-life for MYSELF, I am not so arrogant or pig headed as to say my moral compass should be what dictates someone elses actions.

So, I'll sit this one out.

If you're really going to start debating ethics, I think the Political forum is the last place it should be done.

This is about Politics...and like it or not, Ethics play into Politics. Should they, maybe not. But real world, today, they do.

[HookEm]

This is about Politics...and like it or not, Ethics play into Politics. Should they, maybe not. But real world, today, they do.



Well said.

[HookEm]

The same could be said for any law. Society's moral compass dictates most of our laws, and said compass comes from a sort of "group conciousness."

Just because you do, doesn't mean it does.

You know, there's a WHOLE LOT I could say on this subject. While I am pro-life for MYSELF, I am not so arrogant or pig headed as to say my moral compass should be what dictates someone elses actions.

So, I'll sit this one out.

If you're really going to start debating ethics, I think the Political forum is the last place it should be done.

[Casper]

Some of us truly don't give a fuck about someone else's rugrats and welcome their removal early on instead of letting them grow up to further clog the highway at rush hour.

But I can be that way and not be a hypocrit. If you feel otherwise then start adopting and adding on that extra room or three. And don't bitch about child abuse because someone can't afford separate bedrooms for brother and sister.

[3.8to5.8]

Some of us truly don't give a fuck about someone else's rugrats and welcome their removal early on instead of letting them grow up to further clog the highway at rush hour.

But I can be that way and not be a hypocrit. If you feel otherwise then start adopting and adding on that extra room or three. And don't bitch about child abuse because someone can't afford separate bedrooms for brother and sister.

are u serious :confused: hate to be your kids

[HookEm]

1. I've already adopted one that the mother was planning on putting in the dumpster if she couldnt abort
2. IF you cant afford the extra bedroom space, get fixed maybe?

Some of us truly don't give a fuck about someone else's rugrats and welcome their removal early on instead of letting them grow up to further clog the highway at rush hour.

But I can be that way and not be a hypocrit. If you feel otherwise then start adopting and adding on that extra room or three. And don't bitch about child abuse because someone can't afford separate bedrooms for brother and sister.

[Casper]

3. don't create any pregnancy I'm not prepared to deal with, and be content to support what I have brought into this world.

I don't shed any tears for a zygote that can't adhere to the womb lining. It happens all the time, and a pill that helps insure this sounds great IMO. I don't shed any tears for a fetus that gets shop-vacced either, although I do feel sympathy for a mother who, for whatever reason, feels she has no real choice and has to make that decision. In fact I am happier supporting her decision than if that decision was to have the baby and fall back on my support.

Maybe if people worked in a slaughterhouse for a little while they might learn to accept things a little more rationally. To me it sounds too similar to the "meat is murder" mantra. It isn't the same thing exactly, but the emotions are similar.

[Zarathustra]

3. don't create any pregnancy I'm not prepared to deal with, and be content to support what I have brought into this world.

I don't shed any tears for a zygote that can't adhere to the womb lining. It happens all the time, and a pill that helps insure this sounds great IMO. I don't shed any tears for a fetus that gets shop-vacced either, although I do feel sympathy for a mother who, for whatever reason, feels she has no real choice and has to make that decision. In fact I am happier supporting her decision than if that decision was to have the baby and fall back on my support.

Maybe if people worked in a slaughterhouse for a little while they might learn to accept things a little more rationally. To me it sounds too similar to the "meat is murder" mantra. It isn't the same thing exactly, but the emotions are similar.

Well said, I'll agree.

[Casper]

Well said, I'll agree.

That makes me right! Cool! :D

[Stevo]

Wow. You're calling me a child molester? Where'd that come from?

Sick fuck.

Sorry, it just seems most posts I have read that respond to the odd things you say have mentioned that you are a pedophile, and in true internet fashion, I figured they were true, at least that is how most democrats go about gathering information, word of mouth and things they read on the internet.

Stevo

[Zarathustra]

Funny how this turd advertises how I'm on his ignore list.^^^

[HookEm]

Funny how this turd advertises how I'm on his ignore list.^^^

Right again, as always!

[Paladin]

I'm in the same boat Denny. I was trying to take it to school yard level ;)
The one thing that seems to unify most Christians though is that life begins at conception and abortion is murder. I just find it odd that gpamp has liberal'd up Christ.

Maybe that is why he failed out of Bible College. :confused:

[Zarathustra]

Maybe that is why he failed out of Bible College. :confused:

What, too much sense?

[Paladin]

In September, 1993, Brenda Pratt Shafer, a registered nurse with thirteen years or experience, was assigned by her nursing agency to an abortion clinic. Since Nurse Shafer considered herself "very pro-choice," she didn't think this assignment would be a problem. She was wrong. This is what Nurse Shafer saw:

" I stood at the doctor's side and watched him perform a partial-birth abortion on a woman who was six months pregnant. The baby's heartbeat was clearly visible on the ultrasound screen. The doctor delivered the baby's body and arms, everything but his little head. The baby's body was moving. His little fingers were clasping together. He was kicking his feet. The doctor took a pair of scissors and inserted them into the back of the baby's head, and the baby's arms jerked out in a flinch, a startle reaction, like a baby does when he thinks that he might fall. Then the doctor opened the scissors up. Then he stuck the high-powered suction tube into the hole and sucked the baby's brains out. Now the baby was completely limp. I never went back to the clinic. But I am still haunted by the face of that little boy. It was the most perfect, angelic face I have ever seen." Sounds like a partial "birth" to me afterall the baby made it more than half-way out the "birth" canal.

I just nearly threw up at reading that description. I hope there is a merciful God for the person who did that murder, because I would have no mercy on that persons soul for killing that child.

[Paladin]

Yeah you caught me I made this shit up. Your are on sick fuck if you dont think this has happen. Go smoke somemore dope sick fuck.

Great post! :D

[Paladin]

Some of us truly don't give a fuck about someone else's rugrats and welcome their removal early on instead of letting them grow up to further clog the highway at rush hour.

But I can be that way and not be a hypocrit. If you feel otherwise then start adopting and adding on that extra room or three. And don't bitch about child abuse because someone can't afford separate bedrooms for brother and sister.

So there is no room for personal responsibility? If you honestly feel this way, you live in a very sad world IMO.

[Paladin]

What, too much sense?

You are right Z!

[AL P]

Partial birth abortions have got to be the most barbaric thing I have ever heard of. I got a real fucking problem with it. Anyone who can do that stuff is an animal. I believe there is special place in hell for people who harm children.

I have just as much of a problem with the state telling someone that they have to have a child in some sort of totalitarian manner. You can't force someone to take care of a child in a humane manner. Let's face it, there are a lot of people who should have been abortions themselves, long before they could pollute the gene pool. You can't force these idiots to be good parents and then the child suffers for a long time, in fact we all suffer as a society.

So you have that middle ground to dwell on, which is better.. a merciful death or the possibility of a lifetime of shit? Who knows, I won't be so arrogant as to pretend that I do. As for the religious aspects of it, I've always thought you better be damned comfortable with both your conscience and your beliefs (or lack thereof) if you are going to get an abortion because you won't soon forget it and neither will that higher power that you may pray to later.

[Vertnut]

Partial birth abortions have got to be the most barbaric thing I have ever heard of. I got a real fucking problem with it. Anyone who can do that stuff is an animal. I believe there is special place in hell for people who harm children.

I have just as much of a problem with the state telling someone that they have to have a child in some sort of totalitarian manner. You can't force someone to take care of a child in a humane manner. Let's face it, there are a lot of people who should have been abortions themselves, long before they could pollute the gene pool. You can't force these idiots to be good parents and then the child suffers for a long time, in fact we all suffer as a society.

So you have that middle ground to dwell on, which is better.. a merciful death or the possibility of a lifetime of shit? Who knows, I won't be so arrogant as to pretend that I do. As for the religious aspects of it, I've always thought you better be damned comfortable with both your conscience and your beliefs (or lack thereof) if you are going to get an abortion because you won't soon forget it and neither will that higher power that you may pray to later.
Al, have you always felt that way, or have you become more staunch since the birth of your son? I never liked abortion (especially partial birth), but after watching two of my own be born and grow into very cool people, I've developed a REAL distaste for it. I wonder how many of the proponents have kids, or have been involved in an abortion?

[black01gt]

This is about Politics...and like it or not, Ethics play into Politics. Should they, maybe not. But real world, today, they do.
Ethics. Politics. :D In the same sentence no less... :D

[blownragtop]

I submit for your ridicule the genius that is gpamp…

Number one: "...fetuses who survive..." That doesn't mean, that if the baby's born anyway, they string them up like a black guy on John McCain's lawn. It means, that if the abortion doesn't take, they'll try it again. Now, of course, if you don't believe in abortion, then you had a problem with it, to begin with. But to call it "infanticide" is a stretch, since the word "infant" is in there. I don't care how many articles you read that are anti-abortion, no real scientist will call a fetus an "infant". So, by saying Obama supported infanticide, you are, in fact, a liar.

Number two: You omitted (conveniently, I might add) this: Obama — who joined several other Democrats in voting "present" in 2001 and "no" the next year — argued the legislation was worded in a way that unconstitutionally threatened a woman's right to abortion by defining the fetus as a child.

"It would essentially bar abortions because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this was a child then this would be an anti-abortion statute," Obama said in the Senate's debate in March 2001.

See? I told you. The way the bill was worded, changed the definition of a fetus, so that it would be more possible to make abortions illegal. And while abortion is a whole different argument, you, sir, are a liar.

OBAMA SUPPORTED IT:

During his 2004 run for U.S. Senate, Obama said he supported similar federal legislation that included language clarifying that the measure did not interfere with abortion rights.

Thanks for posting the link. You shouldn't have.



Infanticide? Really? I didn't see ANYTHING that said anything about killing a baby once it's born (infant).

You don't understand that newborns are not dying because of this, do you? The bill was created for the sole purpose of calling "fetuses" "babies", so that it would be easier to outlaw abortions. NO ONE was, or is, killing newborn babies.

The point is, the bill had no point. It was created (and I'm saying this again) for the sole purpose of sneaking in new wording for "fetus" so that abortion can be, someday, outlawed, using this new word. No one was killing newborn babies. It's not like abortions were failing, and the doctors were just waiting for that 9 months to be up so they could shred that baby when he came out. It's a fantastical idea, that HookEm bought into.

No matter how many times on this page it's been proven not the case. No matter that the article that you, yourself, posted said that it was voted against because the bill was trying to slip unconstitutional words in, but then later voted FOR when it was made to be just that, you STILL believe that?


I’m guessing that’s it’s yet to occur to you that Obama IS a politician – and that sometimes politicians say things that aren’t necessarily true. Apparently, in your naïve little world, every utterance of Lord O’ is gospel. And you have the ‘audacity’ to call others ‘sheeple’.

Both you and your hero need to understand that a fetus is unborn – after a live birth(by whatever means) it becomes a child, infant, baby….etc. You and Barack can argue semantics but it doesn’t change the fact that abortions occasionally result in the delivery of a live and (possibly) viable child. I’m not sure what kind of sick, twisted piece of shit can deny medical attention to an infant – but I know exactly what kind can block legislation to protect them.

Your idolatry of this man is mystifying. Your denial of barbaric abortion practices is repugnant. You are one dense, dimwitted, head in the sand, lemming over the cliff, ‘It’s TRUE cause Obama said so”, dumb mutherfucker.

Now I submit for your perusal the bill in question… with a few questions.

How is this redefining a fetus as a child?
Where are the ‘unconstitutional’ words?

Spin your way out of this one Obama boy…


093_SB1083


LRB093 10539 WGH 10793 b

1 AN ACT in relation to civil liabilities.

2 Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois,
3 represented in the General Assembly:

4 Section 1. Short title. This Act may be cited as the
5 Induced Birth Infant Liability Act.

6 Section 5. Findings and intent. The General Assembly
7 finds that all children who are born alive are entitled to
8 equal protection under the law regardless of the
9 circumstances surrounding the birth. Children who are born
10 alive as the result of an induced labor abortion or any other
11 abortion are in special need of protection due to the fact
12 that the intent of their birth is to cause the death of the
13 born child. Therefore, it is the intent of the General
14 Assembly to protect a child who is born alive as the result
15 of an induced labor abortion or any other abortion and to
16 ensure that the child receives all medical care necessary to
17 preserve and protect the life, health, and safety of the
18 child.

19 Section 10. Induced labor abortion; actions. If a child
20 is born alive after an induced labor abortion or any other
21 abortion, a parent of the child or the public guardian of the
22 county in which the child was born may maintain an action on
23 the child's behalf for damages, including all costs of care
24 to preserve and protect the life, health, and safety of the
25 child, punitive damages, costs of suit, and attorney's fees,
26 against any hospital, health care facility, or health care
27 provider who harms or neglects the child or fails to provide
28 medical care to the child after the child's birth. Any
29 damages recovered shall be used to pay for the cost of
30 preserving and protecting the life, health, and safety of the

-2- LRB093 10539 WGH 10793 b
1 child. If the child does not survive, the balance remaining
2 after the costs of preserving and protecting the life,
3 health, and safety of the child are paid shall be deposited
4 into the Neonatal Care and Perinatal Hospice Fund.

5 Section 15. Neonatal Care and Perinatal Hospice Fund.
6 The Neonatal Care and Perinatal Hospice Fund is created as a
7 special fund in the State treasury. Moneys deposited into the
8 Fund shall, subject to appropriation, be used by the
9 Department of Public Health to make grants for neonatal care
10 or perinatal hospice.

11 Section 90. The State Finance Act is amended by adding
12 Section 5.595 as follows:

13 (30 ILCS 105/5.595 new)
14 Sec. 5.595. The Neonatal Care and Perinatal Hospice
15 Fund.

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=&SessionId=3&GA=93&DocTypeId=SB&DocNum=1083&GAID=3&LegID=3911&SpecSess=&Session=

But Obama voted against this bill in the Illinois senate and killed it in committee. Twice, the Induced Infant Liability Act came up in the Judiciary Committee on which he served. At its first reading he voted “present.” At the second he voted “no.”

The bill was then referred to the senate’s Health and Human Services Committee, which Obama chaired after the Illinois Senate went Democratic in 2003. As chairman, he never called the bill up for a vote.

Jill Stanek, a registered delivery-ward nurse who was the prime mover behind the legislation after she witnessed aborted babies’ being born alive and left to die, testified twice before Obama in support of the Induced Infant Liability Act bills. She also testified before the U.S. Congress in support of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act...

At the end of the hearing, according to the official records of the Illinois State senate, Obama thanked Stanek for being “very clear and forthright,” but said his concern was that Stanek had suggested “doctors really don’t care about children who are being born with a reasonable prospect of life because they are so locked into their pro-abortion views that they would watch an infant that is viable die.” He told her, “That may be your assessment, and I don’t see any evidence of that. What we are doing here is to create one more burden on a woman and I can’t support that.”


But if you really want to educate yourself (you don’t – you much prefer the sunshine, rainbows and butterflies of the mythical Obamaland) you can wade through this…

http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/T?&report=hr186&dbname=107&

Here’s a short exert…

Moreover, if, under Carhart and Farmer, a child who survives an abortion and is born alive is not entitled to the protections of the law simply because the child's mother did not intend to give birth, then there is no basis--other than `semantic machinations' and `irrational line-drawing' based on the infant's `born' or `unborn' status, bases which the Third Circuit rejected in Farmer--upon which the government may prohibit an abortionist from completely delivering an infant before killing it or allowing it to die. Under the logic of these decisions, if a woman decides to abort her unborn child, and the abortionist decides that the health risks to the woman are reduced by his not stabbing the child in the back of the skull in order to kill the child before completing delivery--the risk reduction occurring because surgical instruments would not be inserted into the birth canal, and the risk of fetal part retention would be reduced--the abortionist may simply completely deliver the child before killing him or her. The right to abortion created in Roe thus appears to encompass, at least in the Supreme Court's view, the right to infanticide.

At least Obama’s not alone – he’s just goose-stepping along with the logic (or lack thereof) of his fellow leftwing wackos.


These trends reached their logical culmination during a congressional debate on partial-birth abortion in 1999. When Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer was pressed to affirm that she opposed the medical killing of children after birth, she refused to commit, saying that children deserve legal protection only "when you bring your baby home."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/01/AR2008040102197.html

Ignorance like this can only be laughed at – unless you’re on the same side. Right gpamp?

[black01gt]

The same could be said for any law. Society's moral compass dictates most of our laws, and said compass comes from a sort of "group conciousness."
You're right of course but keep in mind...so do Islamic beliefs.

[black01gt]

I’m not sure what kind of sick, twisted piece of shit can deny medical attention to an infant –
HCA Hospital Chain for one....

[gpamp]

Maybe that is why he failed out of Bible College. :confused:
If I "failed out of" Bible College, then you got booted from the force for touching children inappropriately, while on duty.

Did I "fail out"?

[gpamp]

I just nearly threw up at reading that description. I hope there is a merciful God for the person who did that murder, because I would have no mercy on that persons soul for killing that child.
I guess you get scared when reading Stephen King, too. Especially since you nearly threw up after reading a fictional story.

If you think THAT one's good, wait'll you read the book I'm writing about an illiterate cop that befriends a 14 year old girl.

[Denny]

I guess you get scared when reading Stephen King, too. Especially since you nearly threw up after reading a fictional story.

If you think THAT one's good, wait'll you read the book I'm writing about an illiterate cop that befriends a 14 year old girl.
I've heard testimony from a mother who was a participant in a partial birth abortion of her daughter. Her description matched the one that was posted earlier. She made the mistake (another) of asking to see the baby after the abortion was complete. After a couple failed suicide attempts and aggressive councelling, she tells her story to everyone she can. Why would someone even think about making that shit up?

[HookEm]

Because it flies in the face of what pamp spews. Further, it puts him in a position to defend infanticide, so of course everyone else is wrong, but he's right.


I've heard testimony from a mother who was a participant in a partial birth abortion of her daughter. Her description matched the one that was posted earlier. She made the mistake (another) of asking to see the baby after the abortion was complete. After a couple failed suicide attempts and aggressive councelling, she tells her story to everyone she can. Why would someone even think about making that shit up?

[Paladin]

If I "failed out of" Bible College, then you got booted from the force for touching children inappropriately, while on duty.

Did I "fail out"?

So why did you not graduate? I assumed that since you spew ignorant ideas and notions on this board and you said you didn't finish that you flunked out. Please enlighten us sick fuck.

Do you still have dreams about child molestation or do you think about it all day long? BTW, you keep mentioning it so I assume your answer is yes, since the use of child molestation as a slam comes so easy to you. That's what makes you a sick fuck!

[Paladin]

I guess you get scared when reading Stephen King, too. Especially since you nearly threw up after reading a fictional story.

If you think THAT one's good, wait'll you read the book I'm writing about an illiterate cop that befriends a 14 year old girl.

Is the practice by the doctor described in the story factual about a partial birth abortion or not?

Do you still have the dreams about child molestation or do yuou think about it all day long sick fuck?

[Paladin]

I've heard testimony from a mother who was a participant in a partial birth abortion of her daughter. Her description matched the one that was posted earlier. She made the mistake (another) of asking to see the baby after the abortion was complete. After a couple failed suicide attempts and aggressive councelling, she tells her story to everyone she can. Why would someone even think about making that shit up?

Everyone on the planet who knows anything about partial birth abortions knows the practice is as described in the story, he just wants to try and deflect the criticism by focusing on it being a false story becuase the woman in it supposedly does not exist. He is a sick fuck, so what else would you expect?

[Pennywise]

I'd like to abort most of the people posting in this thread.

[Stevo]

I'd like to abort most of the people posting in this thread.

Brilliant contribution.

Stevo

[Pennywise]

Brilliant contribution.

Stevo



I'm here to help.

[Paladin]

Brilliant contribution.

Stevo

Different screen name, same valuable posts. :rolleyes: