Never do today what can be put off until tomorrow - if tomorrow might improve the odds.
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama says “mental distress” should not qualify as a health exception for late term-abortions, a key distinction not embraced by many supporters of abortion rights.
In an interview this week with “Relevant,” a Christian magazine, Obama said prohibitions on late-term abortions must contain “a strict, well defined exception for the health of the mother.”
Obama then added: “Now, I don’t think that ‘mental distress’ qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term.”
Last year, after the Supreme Court upheld a federal ban on late-term abortions, Obama said he “strongly disagreed” with the ruling because it “dramatically departs form previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women.”
The health care exception is crucial to abortion rights advocates and is considered a legal loophole by abortion opponents. By limiting the health exception to a “serious physical issue,” Obama set himself apart from other abortion rights proponents.
The official position of NARAL Pro-Choice America, the abortion rights group that endorsed Obama in May, states: “A health exception must also account for the mental health problems that may occur in pregnancy. Severe fetal anomalies, for example, can exact a tremendous emotional toll on a pregnant woman and her family.”
While still a member of the Illinois legislature, Barack Sanger Obama thrice prevented passage of the state’s version of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA) by voting present, voting no, and then preventing the bill from even coming to a vote while he was the Chairman of the Illinois Senate’s Judiciary Committee. To simply make sure that unwanted infants could not simply be left on a shelf to die after being born, they had to wait until after Obama left for the U.S. Senate. Regardless of whether or not you think that abortion is a woman’s right to choose, consider that NARAL did not even take a position on the federal version of BAIPA. Obama’s position on this was more extreme than that of the most prominent pro-abortion organization. Incidentally, the federal BAIPA passed the Senate unanimously.
Really, now? Let’s take a look at the “specific language” of the Illinois bill:
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) A live child born as a result of an abortion shall
be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate
protection under the law.
Maybe I’m not the smartest kid in the class, but I fail to see how this is not specific and would therefore outlaw all abortions. This part is even better:
“There was a bill that came up in Illinois that was called the ‘Born Alive’ bill that purported to require life-saving treatment to such infants. And I did vote against that bill,” Obama said Tuesday. “The reason was that there was already a law in place in Illinois that said that you always have to supply life-saving treatment to any infant under any circumstances, and this bill actually was designed to overturn Roe v. Wade, so I didn’t think it was going to pass constitutional muster.”
Just to be perfectly clear; a bill that prohibits infanticide is unconstitutional, but the Chicago handgun ban isn’t? Keep in mind that this guy used to teach Constitutional law and only needed to read the Constitution to figure out that nothing in there defends the right to an abortion. This is what you have to expect from someone who believes in the concept of a “living” Constitution, I suppose.
The official position of NARAL Pro-Choice America, the abortion rights group that endorsed Obama in May, states: “A health exception must also account for the mental health problems that may occur in pregnancy. Severe fetal anomalies, for example, can exact a tremendous emotional toll on a pregnant woman and her family.”
The 1973 landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade, established a right to an abortion, and a concurrent case, Doe v. Bolton, established that medical judgments about the need for an abortion could include physical, emotional and psychological health factors.
Rather than admit that their chosen candidate is a duplicitous asshole and stand by their bizarre convictions, NARAL decided to circle the wagons around him:
In a statement, NARAL Pro-Choice said Obama’s magazine interview is consistent with Roe v. Wade.
“Sen. Obama has consistently said he supports the tenets set forth by Roe, and has made strong statements against President Bush’s Federal Abortion Ban, which does not have an exception to protect a woman’s health,” the organization’s statement said.
Now even the Kos Kidz are giving him a hard time for “pandering” to religious groups. I don’t think Obama needs this kind of trouble since they still have not settled down from the Telecom Immunity furor.
Abortion is not generally a make-or-break issue for me. I think Roe v. Wade was a terrible judgement and the worst kind of judicial activism and I oppose abortion for everything except cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother, but a candidate being pro-choice would not automatically rule out my decision to vote for him. That said, I think that Obama’s extreme position on “Born Alive” was disgusting and his cynical attempt to now falsely portray himself as a centrist on this issue should be taken as just further proof that he is as much an unscrupulous and opportunistic Democrat politician as any we have seen before.
Less...
