Join AARP
Join for Just $16 A Year
- Discounts on travel and everyday savings
- Subscription to AARP The Magazine
- Free membership for your spouse or partner
Message Boards Directory
Welcome to the AARP Discussion Board. Here you can talk with peers about current events ranging from Social Security to caring for your parents to the latest on health care reform. It is also the perfect place to exchange healthy eating recipes and job hunting tips.
These forums are for you to engage and have fun meeting new people. Just remember the community code: Be nice!
Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
False
Government & Elections
Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
<font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="1">Whether you're a red state Republican or a blue state Democrat, everyone is welcome — just remember to be civil.</font>
"In 2000, the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) was first introduced in Congress. This was a two-paragraph bill intended to clarify that any baby who is entirely expelled from his or her mothe
0
Cat:d51398b3-89f9-463d-bf1b-4b885f02c9eeForum:af978875-5bc6-4b07-a6fb-b18062132f95
Cat:d51398b3-89f9-463d-bf1b-4b885f02c9eeForum:af978875-5bc6-4b07-a6fb-b18062132f95Discussion:ba76cccd-18c8-44be-9989-e2a7a806d37b
Forums » Politics & Society » Government & Elections » Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
Forums
»
Politics & Society
»
Government & Elections
»
Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
|
Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
posted at February 20, 2012 2:17 PM EST
|
Posts: 374
First: October 22, 2011 Last: May 27, 2013 |
"In 2000, the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) was first introduced in Congress. This was a two-paragraph bill intended to clarify that any baby who is entirely expelled from his or her mother, and who shows any signs of life, is to be regarded as a legal "person" for all federal law purposes, whether or not the baby was born during an attempted abortion. (To view the original 2000 BAIPA, http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/OriginalFederalBAIPA2000HR4292.pdf) In 2002, the bill was enacted, after a "neutrality clause" was added to explicitly state that the bill expressed no judgment, in either direction, about the legal status of a human prior to live birth. The bill passed without a dissenting vote in either house of Congress. (To view the final federal BAIPA as enacted, http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/BAIPAFederal.pdf) Meanwhile, Barack Obama, as a member of the Illinois State Senate, actively opposed a state version of the BAIPA during three successive regular legislative sessions. His opposition to the state legislation continued into 2003 - even after NARAL had withdrawn its initial opposition to the federal bill, and after the final federal bill had been enacted in August 2002. |
|
|
Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
posted at February 21, 2012 12:20 PM EST
|
Posts: 33
First: December 21, 2011 Last: March 19, 2012 |
In Response to Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA): "In 2000, the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) was first introduced in Congress. This was a two-paragraph bill intended to clarify that any baby who is entirely expelled from his or her mother, and who shows any signs of life, is to be regarded as a legal "person" for all federal law purposes, whether or not the baby was born during an attempted abortion. (To view the original 2000 BAIPA, http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/OriginalFederalBAIPA2000HR4292.pdf ) In 2002, the bill was enacted, after a "neutrality clause" was added to explicitly state that the bill expressed no judgment, in either direction, about the legal status of a human prior to live birth. The bill passed without a dissenting vote in either house of Congress. (To view the final federal BAIPA as enacted, http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/BAIPAFederal.pdf ) Meanwhile, Barack Obama, as a member of the Illinois State Senate, actively opposed a state version of the BAIPA during three successive regular legislative sessions. His opposition to the state legislation continued into 2003 - even after NARAL had withdrawn its initial opposition to the federal bill, and after the final federal bill had been enacted in August 2002. " http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2008/aug/08081101 Best to read the whole article just in case somebody tries to explain away his stance. Posted by JimR45 JimR45, please don't waste our time here by quoting from a anti-abortion RAG like the lffesitenews. , First, no intelligent person would read this trash. This would be like buying a trash paper at the grocery store, or worse, wasting your brain watching Faux! A majority of Americans are not interested in trashing women's rights and health care! |
|
|
Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
posted at February 23, 2012 3:35 PM EST
|
|
Posts: 374
First: October 22, 2011 Last: May 27, 2013 |
In Response to Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA): In Response to Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) : JimR45, please don't waste our time here by quoting from a anti-abortion RAG like the lffesitenews. , First, no intelligent person would read this trash. This would be like buying a trash paper at the grocery store, or worse, wasting your brain watching Faux! A majority of Americans are not interested in trashing women's rights and health care! Posted by papabob Your comment adds nothing to the discussion except possibly your acceptance of what our president did, and the extreme position he takes. I am totally opposed to abortion but the position of the president is exceedingly extreme. " WASHINGTON (August 18, 2008, Noon) -- Senator Barack Obama's four-year effort to cover up his full role in killing legislation to protect born-alive survivors of abortions continues to unravel.
In the most recent developments, Senator Obama himself, in a video recorded interview Saturday night with David Brody of CBN News (subsequently broadcast on both CBN and CNN), said three times that National Right to Life was "lying" in asserting that he had voted against a state bill virtually identical to the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. He did not directly address newly uncovered documents that had been released by NRLC on August 11 -- documents that proved that he had done exactly that, contradicting four years of the Obama cover story.
In response, on Sunday, August 17th, we issued a challenge to Obama to either declare the newly discovered documents to be forgeries and call for an investigation of the forgery, or admit that he had misrepresented his record on the live-born infants legislation (not just once, but for four years), and apologize to those he's called liars. We don't have an apology yet. But now there is this, in a news story posted on the New York Sun website lon the evening of August 17th: "Mr. Obama appeared to misstate his position in the CBN interview on Saturday . . . [Obama's] campaign yesterday acknowledged that he had voted against an identical bill in the state Senate . . ." |
|
|
Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
posted at February 23, 2012 8:16 PM EST
|
|
Posts: 544
First: August 9, 2011 Last: June 19, 2013 |
Since you are writing about saving lives, how many lives will be lost to Republican agenda to cutting Social Security and Medicare to people who depend on it the most the elderly and disabled? How many people they will be deprived medecine, health care and food? I,m willing to bet it would be scores more than the number of women who even think about getting an abortion and what is the difference as the cost of lives are concerned? Just thought I'd remind you since you are very interested in saving lives. n Response to Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA): In Response to Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) : Your comment adds nothing to the discussion except possibly your acceptance of what our president did, and the extreme position he takes. I am totally opposed to abortion but the position of the president is exceedingly extreme. " WASHINGTON (August 18, 2008, Noon) -- Senator Barack Obama's four-year effort to cover up his full role in killing legislation to protect born-alive survivors of abortions continues to unravel. In the most recent developments, Senator Obama himself, in a video recorded interview Saturday night with David Brody of CBN News (subsequently broadcast on both CBN and CNN), said three times that National Right to Life was "lying" in asserting that he had voted against a state bill virtually identical to the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. He did not directly address newly uncovered documents that had been released by NRLC on August 11 -- documents that proved that he had done exactly that, contradicting four years of the Obama cover story. In response, on Sunday, August 17th, we issued a challenge to Obama to either declare the newly discovered documents to be forgeries and call for an investigation of the forgery, or admit that he had misrepresented his record on the live-born infants legislation (not just once, but for four years), and apologize to those he's called liars. We don't have an apology yet. But now there is this, in a news story posted on the New York Sun website lon the evening of August 17th: "Mr. Obama appeared to misstate his position in the CBN interview on Saturday . . . [Obama's] campaign yesterday acknowledged that he had voted against an identical bill in the state Senate . . ." http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/Obamacoveruponbornalive.htm Posted by JimR45 |
|
|
Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
posted at February 24, 2012 11:37 AM EST
|
|
Posts: 33
First: December 21, 2011 Last: March 19, 2012 |
In Response to Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA): In Response to Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) : Your comment adds nothing to the discussion except possibly your acceptance of what our president did, and the extreme position he takes. I am totally opposed to abortion but the position of the president is exceedingly extreme. " WASHINGTON (August 18, 2008, Noon) -- Senator Barack Obama's four-year effort to cover up his full role in killing legislation to protect born-alive survivors of abortions continues to unravel. In the most recent developments, Senator Obama himself, in a video recorded interview Saturday night with David Brody of CBN News (subsequently broadcast on both CBN and CNN), said three times that National Right to Life was "lying" in asserting that he had voted against a state bill virtually identical to the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. He did not directly address newly uncovered documents that had been released by NRLC on August 11 -- documents that proved that he had done exactly that, contradicting four years of the Obama cover story. In response, on Sunday, August 17th, we issued a challenge to Obama to either declare the newly discovered documents to be forgeries and call for an investigation of the forgery, or admit that he had misrepresented his record on the live-born infants legislation (not just once, but for four years), and apologize to those he's called liars. We don't have an apology yet. But now there is this, in a news story posted on the New York Sun website lon the evening of August 17th: "Mr. Obama appeared to misstate his position in the CBN interview on Saturday . . . [Obama's] campaign yesterday acknowledged that he had voted against an identical bill in the state Senate . . ." http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/Obamacoveruponbornalive.htm Posted by JimR45 Actually JimR45, there is no discussion here, just to point out that right wing attacks on our President, especially quoting right-wing anti-abortion rags who continually cover what they are and stand for, has failed before and will contnue to fail. First you can still find radical religious persons trying to show our President is Muslim. Won't fly! Then, wasted time blaming the President for ending War in Iraq and killing Bin Laden, like it was a bad thing. Won't fly! Then, attacked the President for saving America's auto industries and million jobs. See how well thats working for Romney! Now that economic and jobs growth is fast become a non-issue, whats left but to go after women's health and freedom of choice. Let's see how that flies, for at least half od the American population! When the President declares a women's right to have insurance covered contraception, the right says that's an attack on male dominated religion, and any women who wants or need contraception, just proves she was a slut whose sexual activity led to her wanting or needing contraception. See Rick Santorum! Is this ALL you righties have left is attack on womens health and choice? Or do you just enjoy trying to control a women's body and reproductive systems? The SC congress-women had the right idea when she proposed a bill that before a man could get a vasectomy, he must first have a state approved, but unnecesary, medical exam. It died pretty quick in the male dominated SC congress! Personally, I feel any real man, who cares about the women in his life, be they friends, spouse, daughter, sister, etc. would be up in arms by this right-wing, radical Republican invasion and attacks on those women. This is the REAL discussion! NO body wants abortions, especially women, whose condition was helped greatly by man who wants no responsibility, and leaves it totally a womens problem. For your edification, thais is why women wants and needs contraception for their own health and protection.! |
|
|
Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
posted at February 24, 2012 11:54 AM EST
|
|
Posts: 33
First: December 21, 2011 Last: March 19, 2012 |
In Response to Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA): Since you are writing about saving lives, how many lives will be lost to Republican agenda to cutting Social Security and Medicare to people who depend on it the most the elderly and disabled? How many people they will be deprived medecine, health care and food? I,m willing to bet it would be scores more than the number of women who even think about getting an abortion and what is the difference as the cost of lives are concerned? Just thought I'd remind you since you are very interested in saving lives. n Response to Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) : I totallyagree with you creppelrm, and might add, that what is never discussed, is that if they succed in their attack on women health and anti-contraception, just like rights to vote, rights to public education, right to health care, etc, can we immagine this country if they elect a special interest, wealthy king as President, say any of the four clowns now running, who do they attack after women?Posted by creppelrm I think we all understand if they can ban contraceptions, when it suits them, they can also demand and force contraception on certain part of American population. It worked in China! We all know how those rich political pacs, like USChamber of Commerce, are partly funded and supported by the Chinese! |
|
|
Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
posted at February 25, 2012 11:51 AM EST
|
Posts: 12549
First: February 29, 2008 Last: June 16, 2013 |
I don't know why MEN get so involved with women's reproduction. But they do....because its all about CONTROL. If they truly cared about human life.....we wouldn't have so many abused human beings.....wouldn't have ALL TOLD that 100 million people — one in three Americans — either live in poverty or in the fretful zone just above it and this includes THEIR CHILDREN. !!! In order for the elite to live at the standard it does, the majority have to go without... and this is one of the major (if not the major) causes of world poverty, albeit one that is largely ignored, unknown or denied. |
|
|
Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
posted at February 25, 2012 3:14 PM EST
|
|
Posts: 374
First: October 22, 2011 Last: May 27, 2013 |
In Response to Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA): Since you are writing about saving lives, how many lives will be lost to Republican agenda to cutting Social Security and Medicare to people who depend on it the most the elderly and disabled? How many people they will be deprived medecine, health care and food? I,m willing to bet it would be scores more than the number of women who even think about getting an abortion and what is the difference as the cost of lives are concerned? Just thought I'd remind you since you are very interested in saving lives. n Response to Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) : Posted by creppelrm My soul is not for sale. Personally I am an independent, but I will not vote for a pro-abortion candidate no matter what party. I find abortion so repulsive and immoral that I cannot vote for someone who supports it. Personally I am struggling with candidates at this time, and social security and medicare are issues for me considering I am 66, however a pro-abortion candidate is no longer a candidate for me. They have made the most defenseless victims. |
|
|
Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
posted at February 25, 2012 3:33 PM EST
|
|
Posts: 374
First: October 22, 2011 Last: May 27, 2013 |
In Response to Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA): In Response to Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) : Actually JimR45, there is no discussion here, just to point out that right wing attacks on our President, especially quoting right-wing anti-abortion rags who continually cover what they are and stand for, has failed before and will contnue to fail. First you can still find radical religious persons trying to show our President is Muslim. Won't fly! Then, wasted time blaming the President for ending War in Iraq and killing Bin Laden, like it was a bad thing. Won't fly! Then, attacked the President for saving America's auto industries and million jobs. See how well thats working for Romney! Now that economic and jobs growth is fast become a non-issue, whats left but to go after women's health and freedom of choice. Let's see how that flies, for at least half od the American population! When the President declares a women's right to have insurance covered contraception, the right says that's an attack on male dominated religion, and any women who wants or need contraception, just proves she was a slut whose sexual activity led to her wanting or needing contraception. See Rick Santorum! Is this ALL you righties have left is attack on womens health and choice? Or do you just enjoy trying to control a women's body and reproductive systems? The SC congress-women had the right idea when she proposed a bill that before a man could get a vasectomy, he must first have a state approved, but unnecesary, medical exam. It died pretty quick in the male dominated SC congress! Personally, I feel any real man, who cares about the women in his life, be they friends, spouse, daughter, sister, etc. would be up in arms by this right-wing, radical Republican invasion and attacks on those women. This is the REAL discussion! NO body wants abortions, especially women, whose condition was helped greatly by man who wants no responsibility, and leaves it totally a womens problem. For your edification, thais is why women wants and needs contraception for their own health and protection.! Posted by papabob Call me what you want if that makes you feel better. I had dealt with some of the issues you mentioned which I think were stupid and more related to bigotry than anything else. I found the arguments on the presidents birthplace and comments about beiing Muslim and a number of issues to be wrong. My issue here is abortion who I consider extremists. The woman's body is not the issue here, but rather what resides inside her which is life, and that is the reason that the idiot in Congress who came up with her statement about her bill was so rediculous since it is not the same thing. For me personally I do not agree with the procedure. Regarding the presidents recent proclamation he stepped across the line by ignoring the first amendment which deals with religious liberty. He was telling Church's what they must do. Their right to religious freedom is protected by the first amendment. Quite honestly I am a strong constitutionalist and consider it the government of the land, which is something the Supreme Court should clarify not use it for the basis of legislating since that belongs to another branch of government. |
|
|
Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
posted at February 25, 2012 3:42 PM EST
|
|
Posts: 374
First: October 22, 2011 Last: May 27, 2013 |
In Response to Re: Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA): I don't know why MEN get so involved with women's reproduction. But they do....because its all about CONTROL. If they truly cared about human life.....we wouldn't have so many abused human beings.....wouldn't have ALL TOLD that 100 million people — one in three Americans — either live in poverty or in the fretful zone just above it and this includes THEIR CHILDREN. !!! In order for the elite to live at the standard it does, the majority have to go without... and this is one of the major (if not the major) causes of world poverty, albeit one that is largely ignored, unknown or denied. Posted by JANMB This is not an attack on woman or an issue of control, but one of life. Life is a gift from God and it is one we should all defend. Many people normally misquote the following. Money is the root of all evil. The actual quote is the love of money is rhe root of all evil. We should all love each other and hence support each other. Those that just accumulate wealth and do nothing for others is a major part of the problem in the world today. If we could alll stop are own selfishness this would be a much greater world in which we live. Look at what a small woman like Mother Therese did. If we had more people like here, just think of the type of world we would have. We have many poor in our own country partially from the greed of others, but also because we do not follow what God wants from us. Love your neighbor as yourself. |
Forums » Politics & Society » Government & Elections » Obama abortion and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA)
