- The Washington Times - Saturday, September 20, 2008


There is a point to be made following Joel Mowbray’s expose of Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama’s blatant obfuscation of the truth regarding his vote against the 2003 Illinois bill protecting babies born alive after botched abortions (Obama’s falsehood,” Op-Ed, Aug. 21). The point is that the candidate’s position on abortion should be examined more closely before more newborn babies are left to die in hospital closets. The bill in question is the 2003 Illinois bill called the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which provided, as Mr. Mowbray wrote, that “in failed abortions resulting in a live birth, the baby must be given normal medical treatment.”

As an Illinois state senator, Mr. Obama voted against the act, and he also expressed his opposition to having an additional physician certify the “born-alive” infant’s viability to sustain life because, in his view, this would only place another burden on the mother´s original decision. In other words, in compliance with the emerging Obama Doctrine on Abortion, the killing of a human being to accommodate a woman’s choice must be consummated at all costs, regardless of consequences.

In voting against a bill enacted to save a newborn infant’s life, Mr. Obama consistently chose to appease his radical pro-choice donors rather than, as the Christian he claims to be, protect the unborn child and the innocent “born-alive” infants who live long enough to have their little voices heard, only to be cruelly abandoned and left to die. In addition, the unwavering support of both Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Mr. Obama for that hideous procedure known as partial-birth abortion — in which the surgeon kills the baby after the baby has partially left the birth canal — signals their unsupportable embrace of a culture of death which a largely conservative and Christian America by the grace of God still refuses to accept.

It is unequivocally clear that in misrepresenting his voting record on abortion in order to woo the all-important Catholic and evangelical voting blocs he needs to win the election, Mr. Obama would rather win an election than save a child’s life.

So, in paraphrasing a well-known biblical passage, we ask: What does it profit Mr. Obama to win an election and suffer the loss of his claimed Christian soul by allowing a living child to be left to die? In this most important election, vote against infanticide.



Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide