An act of dishonestyAnd that’s only the beginning of what’s wrong with the “Freedom of Choice Act” that Sen. Barack Obama promises to sign into law as soon as he takes office as president. There’s no freedom for health care givers in it, no freedom for lawmakers to enforce law on the books now that would be wiped out by it, and no freedom for some women and unborn children caught in its sweeping facilitation of easy abortion. There’s also no choice for health care givers and medical providers who are morally or ethically opposed to abortion on demand, nor for states that now have the right to pass their own laws requiring informed consent or parental notification or health standards for abortion providers. It’s a raw act of power disguised as enshrining a right. A right, by the way, that wasn’t in the Constitution but devised by a Supreme Court Justice (see post below).
And where does John McCain stand on this?
But here’s a key distinction. This implies that as a bill (which existed in the House as H.R. 1964 and the Senate as S. 1173) this legislation would move on to the president. Whereas Sen. Obama has promised that his first act would be to make it law. The question dangling out there (under the radar of mainstream media and most of the public) is whether Obama would do that by executive order, or through his party’s control of Congress as congressional legislation. It’s a question that voters - of all beliefs - need to know. Let the candidates be clear on where they stand, and the votes fall where they may as a result. |
election 2008SheilaLiaugminas
free updates |
Comments
New comment