Voices Empower

So Obama wants it to be about Akin and Abortion~ UPDATED

OK Obama let’s talk about Abortion………. 

obama%20and%20baby.jpgWho is the real radical here? 

Just as Rick Moran over at PJTV stated “….if the president wants to call the GOP position on abortion “extreme,” he better be ready to defend his own positions on the issue which are far outside the mainstream of American thought.” 

Let’s take a look at Obama’s extreme take on Abortion. He has been described as “Obama the abortion extremist,”  by Rich Lowry. 

“Obama opposed the ‘Born Alive Infants Protection Act’ three times”, Lowry writes.

Obama Says He’s ‘Pro-Choice’ on Third-Trimester Abortions, by John McCormack, The Weekly Standard blog. 

During a 2003 press conference, Barack Obama indicated that he thought abortion should be legal in all situations, even late in pregnancy:

OBAMA: “I am pro-choice.”

REPORTER: “In all situations including the late term thing?”

OBAMA: “I am pro-choice. I believe that women make responsible choices and they know better than anybody the tragedy of a difficult pregnancy and I don’t think that it’s the government’s role to meddle in that choice.”  

Are you listening fellow Catholics?   


OBAMA: I just want to be clear because I think this was the source of the objections of the Medical Society. As I understand it, this puts the burden on the attending physician who has determined, since they were performing this procedure, that, in fact, this is a nonviable fetus; that if that fetus, or child – however way you want to describe it – is now outside the mother’s womb and the doctor continues to think that its nonviable but there’s, lets say, movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just out limp and dead, they would then have to call a second physician to monitor and check off and make sure that this is not a live child that could be saved. Is that correct? […]

Obama Partial Birth Abortion / His Televised Debate Com

Images and text courtesy of National Right to Life. The pictures in the video are not fiction. The partial birth abortion is not a rare procedure. It is, essentially, a variant of the even more common and equally gruesome Dilation and Evacuation (D&E) procedure.

There are in fact absolutely no obstetrical situations encountered in this country which require a partially delivered human fetus to be destroyed to preserve the life or health of the mother (Dr. Pamela Smith, Senate Hearing Record, p.82: Partial Birth Abortion Ban Medical Testimony). People like Jill Stanek have exposed a practice, in which children marked for abortion are born alive and then killed. This is exactly where the logic of partial-birth abortion leads.

On November 5, 2003, President George W. Bush signed into law the Partial-birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.

On April 18, 2007 the Supreme Court announced its decision to uphold the ban on partial-birth abortion.

The procedure in question is properly called “partial-birth abortion” because, as even secular sources acknowledge, it requires the doctor to deliver the unborn child partially from the uterus, feet first, leaving the baby’s head inside the womb. The doctor then uses scissors and a hollow needle to empty the skull of its contents. The unborn baby’s head then collapses and the doctor removes the dead baby entirely from the mother’s body.

Given the nature of the procedure, the congressmen who drafted legislation to prohibit it, the “Partial-Birth Abortion Act of 1995”, defined the procedure as follows: “an abortion in which the person performing the abortion partially vaginally delivers a living fetus before killing the fetus and completing the delivery”. The doctors who perform this barbaric act and those who seek to justify it attempt to hide its nature by describing it euphemistically as “intact dilation and evacuation/extraction” or as “intrauterine cranial decompression.

“Physicians Ad Hoc Coalition for Truth” (PHACT), a group of more than 300 medical specialists organized to counter the misinformation provided by the abortion industry of the United States, pointed out: “Partial-birth abortion is never medically necessary to protect the health of a woman or to protect her future fertility; in fact, the procedure can pose grave dangers to the woman”. Many people argue that the anesthetics used in the process kill the baby, so death to the child is painless. However the American Society of Anesthesiologists testified to Congress that this is simply not true.

On July 11, 1995, American Medical News (AMA’s official journal) submitted the transcript of a tape-recorded interview with abortionist Dr. Martin Haskell to the House Judiciary Committee in which he admitted: “…the majority of fetuses aborted this way (partial birth abortion) are alive until the end of the procedure.” As disturbing as this sounds, these are the facts.

In this country medical doctors are partially delivering babies and then killing them. These babies are inches from being born. Many could be born and placed directly in the loving arms of childless couples for adoption. Instead, they are cruelly killed.”  

Henry Hyde’s Speech Against Partial Birth Abortions:

Knowledge is Power and together we can make the difference!!   


Check Out Voices Empower Articles  .

  Please attribute to Alice Linahan  with Voices Empower  

Knowledge is Power~ Click and share with your friends!

previous post: Shark Attack – The Todd Akin Blunder ~What about Communism?


Leave a Reply