Thing with abortion versus the death penalty is that a pro-lifer who supports the death penalty has been consistant, not contradictory.
In both counts, VALUE is put on human life.
In the case of abortion, to be against it is putting value on life. In the case of the death penalty, it also puts a price on life, stating that there is such a thing as a crime so horrible, the penalty is your life.
When it's argued that the death penalty is not a deterrant, then it's safe to say that said criminal could not be deterred, therefore, deterrant is off the table in all counts. We wouldn't get rid of prison because certain criminals are not afraid of it.
Now, the part of Obama's stance on abortion that troubles me the most is his favoring of the allowance of a baby born alive during an attempted abortion being denied life-saving care and efforts.
As soon as this stance has been taken (likewise with late-term abortions), then the 'viability' debate goes out the window. It's the epitome of killing on demand. Even in the case of late-term abortion, medical experts have argued that there's really no medical justification for it, since in many cases, the abortion is more dangerous than just delivering the baby and trying to save both mother and child.
To leave a new-born baby alone in a room to die is beyond sick. That zero-value on human life is deplorable. It's like they're saying a woman who goes in for an abortion is entitled to a corpse.
Barack voted "present" the first time this came down and against the act the 2nd time (as an IL State Senator).
He claimed it was because there were no equal protections to protect Roe V. Wade in the bill (as there were in the Federal bill, which passed, including yea votes from Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer); however, the 2nd bill which he voted against was virtually identical in language.
Think of all the 'when does life begin' arguements that go on out there (some on here), and consider that most say at the very least, when the baby is born and viable, he/she is an individual life (biologically, the baby is certainly a new life form, unique from her/his mother, from a much earlier state...if you're to use and trust science).
Supporting the killing of a baby in this case can not be anything but the murder of an infant...a homocide. Anyone with an ounce of objectivity can clearly see that.
To me, Obama needs to answer 'why' in this case, and not play would'a, could'a, should'a.
Personally, I'm tired of his hindsight versions of how he would have done things. I'm more interested in what he's done and planning to do.
To be against the "Infant Protection Act" is unbelievably radical. But the media seems to spend more time worrying about John McCain's homes.
YouTube - CNN: Barack Obama's opposition to Born Alive Act
Linear Mode
