Posted: Sep 18, 2008, 5:27 PM CST
Now that we have had a few opinions rendered to the post. Some I will address and others I will not. If you want me to, please do ask.
The debate in the IL Senate was on two central issues.
1) Was the child alive?
2) If so, did the medical team that do some thing wrong, by not giving medical aid? E.G. Was it murder, neglant homicide, and some kind of manslauter not to render medical that they had available? Pretty serious charges all.
A third issue was, then should the State of IL have laws to define the actions of Medical Staff doing late term abortions in which this happens.
Had I been on that medical team. We rush that pre mature to the natal care unit, place it in a incubator and see what happens. We take care of the legal issues later. We don't let it die in a broom closet in such a ignoble manner. They debated this in the hospital that day.
I can make that decision by knowing the following. That even if the woman refused to accept the child, assuming it lived. The child is a
few signatures away from being a ward of the state, with a strong
possiblity of adoption. This child can be a part of our country.
Anything wrong here?
Barak Obama position is....that once the woman signs for a abortion....then the fetus is dead to the state and the state does not have rights to intervene. That is what he argued in the IL State Senate. Where is the compassion for voiceless in that?
We have this situation play out 100s of times.....with abused children that are made wards of the State. Totally contridictory to the position Barak takes here.Why does the State and those that represent the state need to take a life because of roe v wade and abortion....need to violate sanctity of life?
To those that say I go back to far in using the births of Moses and Jesus as examples. That is where in the Judeo-Christian faith and law, sanctity of life gets debated from. The morality of the issue faced then, still merits to be in the debate, today. The question is does one to live to the law of the land or to the morality of sanctity of life? I used them to show that these can be at odds and can show modern ones.
Barak is a Havard educated attroney. Roe v Wade, the debate of abortion and sanctity of life, is one that has been in the classroom since the 1970s. He knew the issues here. Only in a debate of a serious manner, he does not choose the right side of the issue....to either his Christian faith or to medical technologies can achieved.
He started to give that "this is above my paygrade" answer way back then in IL Senate.
What is sad here, is the Barak choose to stay to the letter of the law of the land....instead of saying this is place where 'change' is needed. Where medical professionals doing late term abortions need guidance and gov't laws to follow in the case of a living fetus from a abortion.
He dodges a hard ethical question here.
Now I have told you what I would do in both the case of Moses in the basket of reeds and in the case of this pre mature child.
I can guarrantee you...to nearly 100%.....that had that woman been Michelle Obama in a pre mature birth situation.....Barak Obama would have been saying.....take my child to the natal ward and put it in incubator and give it a chance to live. That is the love of parent for a child.
There is no question that Obama loves his children. What he needs to understand is sometimes, the state needs to love children as well. Yet Barak Obama, because of the law of the land, cannot let the state do this in the case of living aborted.
To me that shows a lack empathy and a lack of judgement on the Senators part.
When I hear dogdeball and evasive answers, to criticial issues in the country, from a politician that seeks to be a key leader ......I look for the reason(s) they come. It tells mores about them, than thier telepromted speeches and thier campaign ads.