Obama and the "Born Alive Infant Protection Act"

[mamalone]

I am wondering if anyone here can help me out with information on this. I'd particularly like some insight into his thoughts and rationale regarding this legislation. I am in dialog with several conservative pro-life folk who like much of what Obama stands for but can't get their heads and hearts past the whole abortion issue.

FWIW, my usual tactic is emphasizing how addressing social issues will end up reducing the overall number of abortions, for example women in poverty are more likely to choose abortion when their economic needs are left unmet. I also remind them that overturning Roe vs Wade will not outlaw abortion- it will only throw the issue back to the states.

Anyway, this legislation was new to me and I'd like to be well informed enough to discuss it intelligently. I really think that we could win over a huge number of evangelicals if we could come to some kind of common ground about this hugely emotional and divisive issue.

Editing for clarity. I want to add that Obama voted against this bill which, apparently, was intended to "protect infants who were born alive following an intended abortion"

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Windy]

2. NARAL also supports Obama... sorry... move on. n/t

[mamalone]

3. Umm... no....

I'm not a concern troll... I've been here for years. And I am unabashedly an Obama supporter.

I'd just like to get some input about this issue from fellow DU'ers- people I respect and who have much better political sense than I.

[MidwestTransplant]

4. I don't have an answer but I don't ascribe any nefarious motives to your post.

[mamalone]

5. Thanks:)

I really appreciate that... a lot:)

[JimGinPA]

6. I'm Not Familiar With This Issue - But I Can Vouch For The OP's Credibilty FWIW...

From several previous conversations here.

[mamalone]

8. Thank you JimG...

:)

[Catherina]

7. I don't know much about this and it looks like he's catching hell for it

Obama Blocked Born Alive Infant Protection Act

by Jill Stanek, guest reporter

He often stood alone as an Illinois lawmaker in opposition to protections for babies who survived abortion.


Note: This report first appeared in the April issue of Citizen magazine.

On Jan. 10, 2005, newly elected U.S. Sen. Barack Obama visited former colleagues and staffers at the Illinois state Capitol, where he had served seven years as state senator. I happened to be at the Capitol that day, too, and a friend and I took the opportunity to speak to Obama, who had not yet achieved rock-star status and was still approachable.

We were in Springfield to lobby for passage of the state Born Alive Infant Protection Act, legislation that would require hospitals to care for infants who survive an abortion. Obama spoke against the legislation in 2001 and 2002 and single-handedly defeated it in committee in 2003.

My friend stood in Obama’s path and said, “Senator, we are going to pass Born Alive here in Illinois this year.”

Obama smiled smoothly and agreed, “I think you will,” adding, “I would have voted for the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in Illinois had it been worded the same as the federal bill. I think that’s the position the Democrats should take.”

There’s just one thing he forgot to mention: Obama had stopped his committee from adding the federal wording.

With Obama no longer in the state Senate, the Born Alive legislation passed in 2005.

...

Obama questioned whether the born alive legislation would impede the right to abort and doctor/patient decision-making. He and an American Civil Liberties Union attorney speculated Born Alive would force doctors to resuscitate nonviable aborted babies.

Obama opposed Born Alive in committee, but voted “present” — neither “yes” nor “no,” but merely “present” — on the state Senate floor, one of many “present” votes that Hillary Clinton has cited as evidence that Obama lacks leadership skills. Clinton voted for the federal Born Alive bill, putting her on record as more pro-life than Obama.

...

This was why Keyes alleged during their campaign that Jesus Christ would not vote for Barack Obama, as he explained in an interview with an NBC affiliate:

Christ would not stand idly by while an infant child in that situation died. … Christ would not vote for Barack Obama, because Barack Obama has voted to behave in a way that it is inconceivable for Christ to have behaved.

...

http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000007034.cfm


I think Obama took a stand most people will support. He's morally against it but refuses to legislate morality on others if it violates constitutional law.

[mamalone]

9. Great info... just the type of thing I was hoping for:

Thanks so much Catherina:)

[klook]

10. Of course we can expect Alan Keyes and a right-wing website like CitizenLink

to disparage Obama over something like this.

I agree with your comment: "I think Obama took a stand most people will support. He's morally against it but refuses to legislate morality on others if it violates constitutional law."

There will always be a hard-core anti-abortion segment of the voting public, but they will crawl over broken glass to vote for any Republican.

I think the national consciousness was changed by the Terry Schiavo case. Similarly, the specter of government-forced resuscitation of brain-dead babies is too grotesque an invasion of personal decision making for most Americans to take.

[mamalone]

11. I hear you... and I agree with Catherina too...

Except for this part...
<snip>
There will always be a hard-core anti-abortion segment of the voting public, but they will crawl over broken glass to vote for any Republican.
<snip>

While I do agree with the first part of your statement, that there will always be a hard-core anti-abortion contingency, I disagree that they are bound to the repub party. Honestly, I think that someone like Obama could win over huge swathes of these folks. With his support of legislation like this, it would be a hard sell obviously. But I think if he could frame things differently... perhaps agreeing that abortions are unfortunate and that it would be a worthy goal for us as a society to reduce the number of them. Something like that, some sort of move towards the middle ground that would at least allow some sort of political cover for pro-life folk if nothing else.

Ahhh... I don't know.. like I said, I am not exactly politically savvy:eyes: but it seems to me that the extreme divide in this country over this issue is unhealthy for everyone. If anyone can beget some sort of healing I think Obama is the man to do it.

But then again, maybe it's all just wishful thinking on my part....




edited to add a forgotten <snip>

[klook]

16. I sure hope you're right.

Rational people should all be able to agree that reducing the need for abortions is a worthy goal.

Anybody who's ever had an abortion, or had a friend, family member, or partner who's gone through the experience, can attest that abortion is no picnic.

At the same time, we should all be able to agree that in the end, the pregnant woman is the one who should have the deciding vote on whether to abort the fetus or not.

If we can neutralize abortion as a divisive issue that works for the Republicans, that will be a great victory.

[rucky]

12. Direct them to his interview w/ the 700 Club

Go down that "is it alive?" road with extreme caution.

[Aloha Spirit]

13. Does this help?

http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/04/02/washington_times_wrong_on_obam.php

[mamalone]

14. Oh Yes! That helps a lot!

Thank you so much... and I'm a bit embarrassed because I probably should have been able to find that on my own. I swear I looked for this type of thing, but was coming up empty:blush: All I could find was very critical hit-type pieces on Obama, so again, yes it helps:)

Thanks!

[intaglio]

15. In the UK very premature babies (20 - 22 weeks)

Can be "alive" but stand no chance of survival

23 week births have a "survival" rate of 15% (higher for the USA where the child has been admitted to an ITU). I put survival in inverted commas because there is a significant chance of cerebral palsy, major cognitive imparement and blindness.


citation
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/106840.php