My Take

As the national conventions of both political parties draw near and the general election gets closer, much ado is being made about Barack Obama and his accusation that the National Right To Life group is lying about his position on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act that he fought while in the Illinois State Senate. The position of each side are listed below, but first, a little background.

Jill Stanek is a nurse who was working at Christ Hospital in Oaklawn, Illinois when she made the discovery that infants who were born alive during botched abortions were being left to die in a closet for soiled linen. Through her efforts, the Born Alive Infant Protection Act was brought before the Illinois State Senate. Here is her interview on Hannity and Colmes. Now, the stated positions.

• Barack Obama says he did vote against the bill. His stated reason was because it did not contain the same wording as the Federal bill, which passed the United States Senate 98-0.
• The NRL says the wording on the two bills was virtually identical and therefore, Barack Obama is lying about his reasons for not supporting the bill in the Illinois State Senate.

So, which one is telling the truth? Judge for yourself. Below is the complete text of the Federal bill, Public Law 107-207

Public Law 107-207
U.S. Code
Title 1, Chapter 1:  Rules of Construction
Section 8.
Person”, ”human being”, ”child”, and ”individual” as including born-alive infant
(a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words ”person”, ”human being”, ”child”, and ”individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.

(b) As used in this section, the term ”born alive”, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.

(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being ‘born alive” as defined in this section.

Now, read for yourself the complete text of the bill that Barack Obama killed in the Illinois State Senate, SB 1082.

AN ACT concerning infants who are born alive.

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

Section 5. The Statute on Statutes is amended by adding Section 1.36 as follows: (5 ILCS 70/1.36 new)

Sec. 1.36. Born-alive infant.

(a) In determining the meaning of any statute or of any rule, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative agencies of this State, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual” include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.

(b) As used in this Section, the term “born alive”, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after that expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.

(c) Nothing in this Section [the bill] shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being born alive as defined in this Section.

Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon becoming law.

As you can see for yourself, the two bills are virtually identical, so why is Barack Obama lying about his stated reasons for killing the bill? For the moment, I will leave you to draw your own conclusions, but one fact remains clear. Barack Obama is the one lying. Below is the text of his speech when he spoke against the Illinois bill on the floor of the Senate.

Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we’re really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a — a child, a nine-month-old — child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it — it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute.

You be the judge as to why Barack Obama worked so hard to kill SB 1082 in the Illinois State Senate.

That’s my take!

Larry