Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Why I Am NOT Voting for Obama -- PART II

If you did not read yesterday's post, STOP. Read that first. Then we can still be friends!

I believe in LIFE. Yup, I think that we kind of skip over that part of the Constitution about LIFE, and jump straight to “liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” (Please notice that we are NOT guaranteed happiness, just the right to PURSUE it, but that is a different post for a different day!). I hate being reduced to a one-issue voter, though. I am deeper than one issue. I have thoughts about the war, the economy, health care, gun control. Thoughts that I have formed through long and hard consideration, opinions that are well-reasoned and dearly-held. But once again, this year, I will be voting primarily over one issue and frankly, it kind of irks me that I will be forced to do that AGAIN. But I am left with no choice because the issue is fundamental to the core of my being.

Am I pro-life in the anti-abortion kind of way? Yes, I am. And again, I speak from a well-reasoned point of view. I was an unwed woman with an unplanned pregnancy and at the time, my life would have been a whole lot “easier” if I had just exercised “my choice” and made the whole situation go away. I would be a liar if I said I didn't consider it, but I must say that it was only for a fleeting moment. It's amazing how those bedrock principles you think you hold dear really hold up when the opportunity presents itself to actually put them into practice! I literally thank God everyday for my beautiful daughter and the clarity and sanity that prevailed in choosing life. But even the abortion issue is not what I am writing about. I think that most people have pretty clear views on that one way or another and are not going to be swayed. So be it. (I am also one of the few pro-lifers I know who think that Roe vs. Wade will never be overturned. I think it is foolhardy for pro-lifers to think it and alarmist for pro-choicers to say a political candidate will accomplish it.)

Indeed, Obama believes in abortion. At a townhall meeting on March 31, 2008, Obama said of his daughters (in the context of a conversation on HIV/AIDS and sex education), “I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby." Wow. Look into your kid's eyes and see if you could ever think of them as “punishment” or "mistake." But even this is not why I am not voting for him. I am not voting for Barack Obama, a senator from my home state, because he has on several separate occasions voted in favor of infanticide. Yes, killing babies. This is NOT an abortion issue. This is about live babies, with BIRTH certificates, being allowed to inhumanely die without being given any medical care or intervention. I'm sorry, but in a gray world, this is a black and white issue and it is WRONG. And for me, it is unforgivable. Recently the media has picked up on this issue a little, but I have known about this since 2002 and have been stewing ever since.

While Obama was in the Illinois State Legislature he voted against the Induced Infant Liability Act which would have mandated medical attention for any baby born alive. It sought to offer equal treatment under the law for babies who survived premature inducement for the purpose of abortion and wanted babies who were born prematurely and given life-saving care. It was virtually identical to the federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act signed into law by President Bush with only 15 House members opposing it and unanimous Senate support.

The language in both bills meant it would have NO IMPACT on Roe vs. Wade. NARAL Pro-Choice America released the following statement when it was being debated at the federal level: “Consistent with our position last year, NARAL does not oppose passage of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act ... floor debate served to clarify the bill’s intent and assure us that it is not targeted at Roe v. Wade or a woman’s right to choose.”

But Obama voted against the Illinois version of the bill twice and killed it in committee a third time. (To be fair, he voted “present” the first time and “no” the second. Same thing!!) This was just six short years ago. Does he truly support infanticide? Does he merely lack good judgment? This is a bill that was supported at the federal level by the likes of Hillary Rodham-Clinton, Ted Kennedy and other uber-liberal, pro-choice senators. Either way, Obama is totally out of touch on this issue, and it is not one to be taken lightly.

This is LIFE. BABIES. Children who were left to die in laundry closets, cold and alone. I wouldn't treat a puppy that way, let alone a child. And frankly, I have no ears to listen to anyone who would say that this is okay. Ignorance is not an excuse. Protecting Roe vs. Wade has been proven not to be a valid excuse. There is no excuse. This is America. We are a culture of life. We are not China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea. Life is woven into the very fabric of our Constitution. At the Saddleback Civil Forum, Pastor Rick Warren asked, "At what point is a baby entitled to human rights?" Obama dodged the question by responding, "Answering that question with specificity is above my pay grade." Well, that's just great. Wherever you are on the pro-life/pro-choice issue, I think we can all agree that if you are born and have a birth certificate, you might be alive and therefore have "human rights." But apparently in Obama's world, that's not enough.

Even so, I know that my vote is not going to count. Illinois is always a blue state and especially this year, will go to Obama. But I believe in personal responsibility when it comes to civic duty, so I will go the ballot box this year and cast my vote and pray and hope that against the odds, McCain will win. I hope a lot of Illinoisans will vote and make the race close so that Obama knows that his home state doesn't give him a carte blanche mandate.

Finally, I have posted this video after much soul-searching. I don't like being manipulated emotionally, and I don't like to emotionally manipulate others. I don't think that Obama is a closet Muslim, and I don't care that his middle name is Hussein. I don't believe that he as president would have all that much power or be able to make even half of his promises come true so my underwear is not in any kind of a bunch! I also believe in the sovereignty of God and that he “allows rulers their thrones.” But I do believe that it is morally imperative to vote your convictions, and more than any other topic, I believe in the sanctity of life. For me it is not a political issue, but a moral one, akin to the slavery issue of the 19th Century. So I post this video with the caveat that I do not necessarily agree with all of nohussein.org's tenets, but the testimony of the nurse and the final visual of the baby is just too powerful not to be seen.


TropicGirl said...

I've seen the video before. I got chills reading your post. I agree wholeheartedly!

A in Texas said...

Nice Blog, I wholeheartedly agree. Good memories of our old home... all while listening to "Jessica's Theme"... oh for simpler times.

Anonymous said...

Ok, so I now notice all your posts are from your family! But we agree with you. I too have great memories of that house...and Jessica's theme! Yep, I'm with you about the one issue voter. However, this issue with Obama is just so big. I had this exact conversation with someone the other day.
Love you

Andrea said...

Hey...love your new blogs layout. I don't know how long it's been up but I usually read through google reader so I hadn't seen it. Awesome!

Anyway, I'm curious what you thought about Obama's defense of this very issue in last nights debate. Did you see it? The transcript can be found here...http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/debates/third-presidential-debate.html

At 1:04:46 Bob asks the candidates if they would appoint a supreme court judge who disagreed with their stance on Roe Vs. Wade. Those answers are interesting but at 1:09:49, McCain brings up the issue you are talking about. At 1:11:19 Obama gives his rebuttal.

If what Obama says checks out, would that change your opinion of him? There's a little more info here http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obama_and_infanticide.html.

Biblioteca Chica said...

Hey all -- thanks for the comments!

And to address Andrea specifically (and thanks for commenting and questioning!!! I love it!): El Guapo & I were discussing the exact same thing last night after hearing Obam's defense of his voting record/position. It is true that the 2001 & 2002 versions of this bill in the IL State Legislature did not have the EXACT wording as at the federal level. Obama's own statements at those floor discussions reveal that he viewed the bill as an abortion issue and did not want to in any way impinge on abortion rights (as he stated last night). I was going to put the quotes here, but they are long (they are in the factcheck.org site cited above.) Long story short, he considered this bill to be an anti-abortion statute, so he voted against the bill based on his stance on abortion which I fundamentally disagree with. However, of course, that was not the point of my arguement.

The 2003 version of the bill is the crux of the matter, b/c this is the bill that he killed in committee when he was the head of the Committee on Health & Human Services. This is the bill that has the identical wording to the federal bill he claims he would have voted for, so clearly his claim cannot be entirely true.

There is some veracity to the claim that some existing legislation was on the books. Here is the law to which he referred last night: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/documents/072005100K6.htm. Indeed doctors in Illinois were required to attempt to provide abortive measures that kept viable fetus' alive (!?) huh! and then provide the care of a separate physician for the live fetus. The reason this bill was not deemed strong enough is that there are numerous loopholes (and b/c it is just plain ridiculous--abortion drs trying to save the life of the fetus?!), as well as, the fact that it clearly was not being enforced as evidenced by Christ Hospital (and other abortion-performing hospitals). The Born Alive Act was meant to close the loopholes and specifically address the fact that children were being born, being issued birth certificates and being denied basic medical care that would have been extended to babies of the same term who were "wanted." It was about equal protection under the law for acknowledged live births.

Frankly, Obama was astute enough to realize the dichotomy there that these were viable children and thier only distinction was based on whether or not they were wanted by their parents which does put one on unstable ground in regards to the abortion issue (the same way killing a pregnant woman is sometimes charged as a double homicide). But this lapse in logic was ignored by both sides and language protecting Roe v. Wade was written into the bill.

All that to say, I still hold Obama accountable for his position on life issues. I believe that I will stand before God someday and give an account. I don't ask whether or not God is on my side, but rather am I on HIS. So I think I'll err on the side of life and take my chances there.

Anonymous said...

I was watching last night for the 5 minutes I was not annoyed. And heard Obama say he supports performanced based pay for teachers. And why do teacher's unions support him?

TropicGirl said...

"Performance based pay for teachers"? HA HA HA HA !! If the WORLD were performance based, then teachers should all be millionaires and CDO's should......don't get me started.
If Obama becomes president, I'm happy to stay working outside the states. Ridiculous--merit based pay in places where school have not enough resources, where the kids struggle to take care of their parents AND make it to school on time, where the test results reflect the poverty and therefore teachers are paid like paupers!

Biblioteca Chica said...

"Performance-based" sounds good to people outside the teaching profession, but it is really not fair. The "performance" in question is not the teacher's performance, but the students'. While there must be some accountablility (we all have terrible-teacher horror stories!), it is not fair for teachers to shoulder the burden of student performance on their own. What about parent performance?

How about tax credits for parents whose kids get good grades and stay out of trouble? Or tax penalities or fines for parents whose kids get in trouble or get bad grades. (spoken in jest--Chicago is PAYING students labeled "at risk" for good grades or some such nonsense. . . .)

TropicGirl said...

You must be kidding! Chicago is PAYING students to get good grades??!?!?!?!?? I always thought it was foolishness when parents did it. For the government to do it is ludicrous! Good thing I'm listening to Jessica's Calming Theme, or I might....never mind! That movie was on TV the other night, and I thought of ya!

TropicGirl said...


The video here struck me, relating to your post.

Biblioteca Chica said...

AWESOME video! I am not Catholic, but I agree with many Catholic beliefs. What a powerful and moving video . . . and so TRUE.

TropicGirl said...

You need to participate in NaBloPoMo.
That way, I can read more of your posts more often!