Re: What Dead Kids?

by Peter Kirsanow

Mark, what’s more disturbing: A national media that refuses to cover the Gosnell trial or the fact that we have a president who worked vigorously to kill an Illinois bill that would have outlawed some of the same practices that took place in that Philadelphia house of horrors?

As an Illinois state legislator, Barack Obama repeatedly voted against a state bill identical to the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (“BAIPA”) passed by Congress in 2002. The Illinois version of BAIPA was introduced to provide legal protections to babies born alive after unsuccessful abortion attempts. The Illinois bill was a reaction to evidence that babies born alive after botched abortions had been left alone in garbage bins and utility closets — without medical care, comfort, or sustenance — until they died.

Obama had opposed the Illinois version of BAIPA because it ostensibly conferred equal protection — i.e., personhood — on “pre-viable” fetuses, thus rendering the bill an unconstitutional anti-abortion measure. The Illinois bill, however, had the same language as the federal bill, which ensured that it could not be used to restrict abortion otherwise. Not a single U.S. senator voted against  BAIPA. Even NARAL didn’t oppose it.

In language eerily similar to that used last week by a Planned Parenthood representative testifying about a comparable Florida bill, Obama asserted that the Illinois BAIPA was problematic because it ”burdened the original decision” of the woman seeking an abortion. The original decision was not to have a live baby; providing care to a baby born alive after a botched abortion would frustrate that decision.

When does the president think a baby born alive is entitled to equal protection under the law? An hour after birth? A day? A week?

When does the president believe a living baby becomes a person?

(This post has been updated).

The Corner

The one and only.