From the article: "Obama says he fought for his health care law to ensure
individuals have the right to make their own medical choices."Except of course the choice of whether or not to have health insurance.
Really, is that ALL the President had to say on the subject of abortion? When a
trial is now going on for an abortion doctor who it looks like killed three live
babies after their botched abortion births? And he goes to the vacuous rant of
taking the country back to the 1950s. Empty suit of a man, much less a
Did Obama mention that he stood with Planned Parenthood on the ability to kill
babies after they were born alive after a botched abortion? Probably not. And
we call ourselves a "civilized" society.
I doubt that anyone really wants to turn back the hands of time to when women
snuck into back alleys to get an abortion. I believe the real goal to protect
the most innocent and vulnerable members of our society -- those who are losing
the "right to life" at a rate of 1 million annually. For the POTUS to
suggest anything different is just one more example of his inability to lead.
back to when we didnt kill babies?yep. bring it on.
@metaSo how is your version of what the law would be different then were
we were at as in the 1950's? either way women would not be able to get
Ahh - the 1950's when a human life was actually valued.
George: Thank you for asking. Abortion should not be illegal. It
is a necessary medical procedure. In limited cases, it may be the only means of
preserving a woman's life.Neither should abortion be as casual
of a choice -- rate of 1 million per year -- as it currently is. It is my
opinion -- and I offer it only as such -- that the laws that are now entering
the books of many states are designed to limit abortions to the earliest stages
of pregnancy with the intent of helping women understand the significance --
that is, the taking of a human life -- of their decision.Should
abortion be reprehensible? In my opinion, yes, every bit as much as the shooting
of 20 school children by a crazed man. That a decision for the former is taken
so nonchalantly in our society may be a contributing factor to the later.I hope this helps you understand my feelings regarding abortion.
@metait does thank you for your clarification.
Are some of you trying to tell us that there were no abortions back in the
'50s? That would be false!Meta: When would abortion be a
necessary medical procedure? And why would preserving the life of the mother
supercede the life of the unborn? I truly do not understand how one can believe
there are exceptions when it comes to abortion.
@ Meta: The problem with many of the state laws currently being passed is that
they limit legal abortions to so early in the pregnancy, that many women
don't even know they are pregnant before the abortion becomes illegal. Add
to that the delay caused by waiting periods and you are back to back alley
abortions.Additionally, most late-term abortions are not abortions
of choice - they are usually for medical necessity. Right now, there is a woman
in El Salvador who needs an abortion to save her life, but if she gets one she
will go to jail. Either way, the child she does have loses it's mother.
And let's not forget the woman who died in Ireland earlier this year. And
those are just the cases that have made national/international news.@ Obama10: Neither Planned Parenthood nor Obama think babies born alive after
a failed abortion attempt should not be allowed to live - in spite of the
hyperbole being spread that claims otherwise.@ SCfan: A trial for a
doctor who violated abortion laws and whose clients went to him from a lack of
other options. Anti-abortion laws will increase scenarios like that - not
@bxscribe: In the majority of circumstances where an abortion is needed to
preserve the life of the mother, the fetus/child will also die if the mother
dies. The question is not "the mother or the child?" The question is
"one life or two?"There are some who, if the question is the
mother or the child, believe the answer should be neither or both and see no
middle ground. Others believe it should be up to the woman, her spouse (if she
has one), her doctor, and her God.Abortion should be legal, safely
available, and rare. Any questions about what happens when it's not can be
answered by the currently on-going Kermit Gosnell case, the woman and her child
who died in Ireland because she was unable to have an abortion, and the current
El Salvador situation of the woman who needs an abortion for medical reasons and
can't have one even though the fetus is missing a huge part of its brain
and skull and is non-viable anyway.
Obama is so transparent.......Rush said it best......Last week
Barack Obama talking about what happened in Boston said, "If we can save
just one child. If we can save just one child," and today Obama goes and
celebrates an abortion factory and closes by saying "God bless you" to
@TRUTH: Many people do not consider a fetus a child. For those individuals,
there is no contradiction between Obama's statements.
The rest of the story not mentioned here: Obama to Largest Abortion Provider:
'God Bless You'"Thank you, Planned Parenthood. God bless
Tolstoy: Thank you for adding substantially to this conversation and doing so
civilly. For the more part, I agree with you, particularly your
statement that "abortions should be legal, safely available, and rare."
In the US, only two of those three are reality. And the reasons that abortion
is appropriate in cases you cite in Ireland and El Salvador are rarely the
reasons women in the US choose to get abortions. So, we have a
terrible conundrum. We need to have abortion legal so that women/families that
truly need one can have access to one. But abortion also must be rare to
protect the "right to life" of the most innocent and vulnerable members
of our society. How do we accomplish the task?
@ meta: We make it rare through education and access (two of the many services
offered by Planned Parenthood).In an ideal world, only married
couples who are ready and willing to have children would engage in sex - but
that is not the world we live in. To be effective, our approach to pregnancy
prevention must be based in the real world. This means educating both genders
on respect for themselves and their partners and effective pregnancy and illness
prevention techniques. It means making access to prevention measures easy and
affordable.It means teaching spacing of pregnancies for greater
health for mothers and their children. It means removing the stigma associated
with mental health care and making sure all pregnant women have access to
prenatal care. It means educating men about the importance of these things.So many commentators are concerned that innocent lives not be taken
through abortion - but their tune changes entirely when it comes to making sure
born children have enough to eat. (See comments on hunger in Utah.) If we want abortion to be rare, we must care as much about people after they
are born as we do during the period from conception to birth.
If we can save just one child's life with gun control, wouldn't it be
worth it?--Obama two weeks ago.What about the life of a baby?
Can't just pick, and choose to fit your political agenda.Wrong
is wrong, no matter how you spin it.
Oxymoron- "legalized abortion?" Is there a difference between
abortion, and murder??