[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
United States News Title: When Obama chose his church over his state The fix may have been in on Barack Obama's opposition as state senator to Illinois' Born Alive Infant Protection Act, aka support of infanticide. I've always wondered what compelled Obama not to just vote against Born Alive but attempt single-handedly to thwart its passage, not once, not twice, but three times. In 2001 and 2002, Obama was the lone senator speaking against Born Alive on the Senate floor. In 2003, Obama killed the bill altogether by burying it alive in a committee he chaired. I asked former state Sen. Patrick O'Malley why he thought Obama went so far. O'Malley introduced Born Alive and served with Obama on the Judiciary Committee both years the bill was argued there. "I think he was internally struggling with it," said O'Malley. "His dilemma was obvious. On one hand he holds himself out to be a constitutional scholar, and, of course, our Constitution makes clear that persons born are entitled to all the rights and privileges of full citizens. He consistently characterized the issue before us as being about abortion, but the legislation had nothing to do with Roe v. Wade. It focused on persons born alive. It was so easy to be on the right side of the angels here, but he wasn't." He was on the wrong side of politics, too. By the third time Obama tried to snuff Born Alive, he was running for the U.S. Senate. The federal version had passed the year before unanimously in the Senate and almost unanimously in the House. Even NARAL went neutral. Pro-aborts agreed to let it pass without a fight lest they appear extreme. Except Obama. He decided to battle alone further left than any other senator – Boxer, Clinton, Kennedy, Kerry, et al. Risky. Odd. I might have agreed with O'Malley that Obama fought his internal battle externally, realizing to accept preterm live aborted babies as legal persons weakened his private justification of abortion. But something in this scenario smelled. The first Mayor Daley once said, "There is nothing so wholesome as a fish," which was his way of defending Chicago politicians, who always smell fishy. Obama is one. So with the new information out about Obama these days, I re-examined the evidence and found some interesting facts: * Obama has been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago since 1988; * TUCC is a member of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice; * TUCC's pastor is Dr. Jeremiah Wright Jr., whom Obama calls a spiritual adviser and whom Obama thanked in his 2004 U.S. Senate victory speech, along with "fellow Trinitarians," before his wife; * From 1986 to 1989, Wright served on the Board of Directors of Evangelical Health Systems; * In 1995, EHS merged with another health system to create Advocate Health Care, controlled jointly by the United Church of Christ and Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, both pro-abortion; * One Advocate property is Christ Hospital, where in 1999 I discovered babies were being aborted alive; * One prominent Advocate board member is the Rev. Dr. Ozzie Smith Jr., a former associate pastor at TUCC under Wright; * Another Advocate board member, Melbalenia Evans, is TUCC's former executive minister; * TUCC is the United States' largest UCC church. Ebony listed Wright as one of the 15 greatest black preachers. Advocate is the largest nonprofit healthcare provider in Chicago. Talk about crossroads of power and money. Speaking of crossroads, TUCC is located five miles from Christ Hospital. So, which explanation makes more sense, that the fire rose in Obama's belly to fight for what he nobly but foolishly thought was the sacred right to infanticide, that he decided, by golly, this was why he was elected, and even if he stood alone, looking like a left-wing extremist, he was going to protect that right? Or that Advocate got to Obama through its UCC contacts? Am I inferring faith has no place in legislative decision-making? No. To assert laws should be written, passed or failed in a moral vacuum is to assert the impossible, since laws are expressions of morality. No, the question Obama must answer is whether his church or Advocate influenced him. Obama has a shady history. Was there quid pro quo? Advocate recently fell from grace with Obama, Wright and TUCC. They believe Advocate is ignoring their community's poor. I'm surprised they are surprised Advocate might be mistreating the least of these. I also think they have a lot of nerve.
Poster Comment: Anyone who thinks you should abort babies in the womb is evil. People who think you should abort born babies is also evil. If Obama is for killing babies he would make a lousy President. It is a shame because he talks a good talk and has a message that is positive and inspiring. Just another snake oil salesman.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|