Skip to main content

Palin: "Obama thinks [Partial-birth Abortion is] a Constitutional Right"

-“Barack Obama wouldn’t even stand up for the rights of infants born alive during an abortion," Palin said

-
She recalled that the late Democratic Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan described partial-birth abortion as “too close to infanticide.”


"Barack Obama thinks it’s a constitutional right, but he is wrong."


http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/palin_abortion_obama/2008/10/13/140021.html

Palin Castigates Obama for Supporting Abortion

Monday, October 13, 2008 3:33 PM

By: Phil Brennan

GOP vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin soundly criticized Sen. Barack Obama's pro-abortion record during a rally for her running mate, Sen. John McCain.


“Barack Obama wouldn’t even stand up for the rights of infants born alive during an abortion," Palin said at the rally in Johnstown, Pa. Saturday. "These infants — often babies with special needs — are simply left to die."


Invoking the GOP ticket’s stand against abortion, she told the audience, “In this same spirit, as defenders of the culture of life, John McCain and I believe in the goodness and potential of every innocent life. I believe the truest measure of any society is how it treats those who are least able to defend and speak for themselves. And who is more vulnerable, or more innocent, than a child?"


Turning to her own experience, the Alaska governor recalled that, when she learned that her unborn son, Trig, would have special needs, she said, "I had to prepare my heart for the challenges to come. At first I was scared, and (husband) Todd and I had to ask for strength and understanding. But I can Tell you a few things I’ve learned already."


Declaring that "every innocent life matters,” she added, "Everyone belongs in the circle of protection. Every child has something to contribute to the world, if we give them that chance. There are the world’s standards of perfection . . . and then there are God’s, and these are the final measure. Every child is beautiful before God, and dear to him for their own sake."


Few issues are as important as “who is protected in law and who isn’t — who is granted life and who is denied it," she said, adding that she "listens very carefully when Senator Obama speaks about questions of life.


"I listened when he defended his unconditional support for unlimited abortions. He said that a woman shouldn’t have to be — quote — 'punished with a baby.' He said that right here in Johnstown — 'punished with a baby' — and it’s about time we called him on it."



Citing what she called Obama's evasiveness on the subject of abortion, Palin said, "Americans need to see his record for what it is. It’s not negative or mean-spirited to talk to about his record. Whatever party you belong to, there are facts you need to know."


She said Obama has voted against bills to end partial-birth abortion, citing his record in the Illinois Senate, when a bipartisan majority passed legislation against the practice. "Senator Obama opposed that bill. He voted against it in committee, and voted 'present' on the Senate floor. In that Legislature, 'present' is how you vote when you’re against something, but don’t want to be held to account," she said.


She recalled that the late Democratic Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan described partial-birth abortion as “too close to infanticide.”


"Barack Obama thinks it’s a constitutional right, but he is wrong," she said.


Obama "is a politician who has long since left behind even the middle ground on the issue of life,” she said. “He has sided with those who won’t even protect a child born alive. And this exposes the emptiness of his promises to move beyond the 'old politics.' "


Voting for Obama “is a vote for activist courts that will continue to smother the open and democratic debate we need on this issue, at both the state and federal level,” she said.


"A vote for Barack Obama would give the ultimate power over the issue of life to a politician who has never once done anything to protect the unborn.”


Obama "offers no hope at all in meeting this great challenge to the conscience of America," she said.





© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...