Barack Obama says his biggest mistake was to vote to help Terri Schiavo avoid being starved and dehydrated to death, according to LifeSiteNews.
"It wasn't something I was comfortable with, but it was not something that I stood on the floor and stopped. And I think that was a mistake," Obama said at the debate. "And as a constitutional law professor, I knew better ... and I think that's an example of inaction, and sometimes that can be as costly as action."
Obama was referring to his vote in March 2005, when the Senate passed a bill by unanimous consent that permitted Schiavo's parents and brother to make their case before federal courts to keep their brain-injured daughter alive via feeding tube. Terri Schiavo's husband Michael, who had guardianship over her while engaged in public adultery with a girlfriend, had a state judge remove her feeding tube, dehydrating her to death, because he claimed she never wanted to live in a so-called persistent vegetative state (PVS).
Seems pretty outrageous that anyone, much less a presidential candidate, would say voting to help keep a disabled woman alive, helping her avoid the death by starvation and dehydration her husband (who was living with another woman and fathering children by the other woman) was determined to subject her to.
But then, this is par for the course for a man who vehemently refused to protect the lives of infants born alive after failed attempts to abort them.
It's also in character for a man who has pledged to torpedo the sanctity of marriage and undermine the American family.
And it's also not a surprise from someone who would go on video and pledge to gut the United States military.
How can any sane American even consider voting for Barack Obama?
I'm not big into prophetic predictions of judgment and such, but I don't see how, if the majority of Americans elects Barack Obama to the presidency, this nation can escape judgment on a truly Biblical scale.
4 comments:
The hypocrisy of the Schiavo debacle hurt the so-called conservative right-wing. It's a major reason the Republicans our on the ropes, so I pray that you don't drop this issue, Bob!!!
The successful propagation of lies about the Schiavo debacle has hurt conservatives in some quarters.
Anyone who opened their eyes and examined the evidence, however, knows that we allowed the state to execute a disabled woman--for no crime whatsoever--so that her husband could get her out of the way and get on with his new life.
Terri Schiavo is on video laughing, smiling, reacting to positive and negative stimuli, looking at a moving object, recognizing people, and attempting to talk. She was not the brain-dead vegetable the death-advocates claimed she was.
What was done to her was despicable, and everyone in the country who gave and still gives hearty approval to it is going to answer for that in eternity someday.
When it came to the Schaivo situation, it's amazing how it was turned upside down by both sides. Think of it this way: What was the Schaivo REALLY about? Most people don't even know. The issue at hand wasn't whether or not Schaivo should live or die. The issue at hand was does the Government get to decide that or should it be the family of the victim?
This woman's husband actually did the research. He made an informed decision. Families "pull the plug" EVERY DAY! That means someone will be taken off life support today. Tomorrow and the day after. Why is the government not stepping in on all of them? And that's what I found strange. The issue at hand was whether or not the government should've stepped in. THAT was the issue. Not whether or not anyone should've pulled the plug. Most Americans (more than half the nation, this means even Conservatives agreed on this) said that the government didn't have any right to make that decision. THAT was the issue.
Obama didn't say, "It was a mistake to help Terri Schaivo." He's merely stating what most of the nation was thinking. Not that it was a mistake to help Schaivo. But that it wasn't up to the government. Conservatives are always saying the government shouldn't be involved in personal affairs. But they broke that rule when they decided the Terri Schaivo affair was their business.
The government's role was an issue, but the main issue always was whether Terri Schiavo should live or die; if you can't grasp that elemental truth, then it's no wonder you're confused by this. Terri Schiavo's life wasn't a game or an academic football to be kicked around; it was the first, last and main thing she had.
Life and death supersedes all other issues.
As for the government's role in this, it had only one legitimate role: the protection of innocent human life. It had the opportunity to do that...and in the end, failed to do so.
As Thomas Jefferson so rightly said, "The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction,
is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
All other rights, as important as they are, pale in comparison to the right to life. If government fails to protect innocent human life, it cannot be relied on to protect any of the lesser rights.
Post a Comment