October 22, 2008

HOPE ON Project, Day 3: Let’s Never Find Out Part 3 — ‘Punished’

Filed under: Life-Based News,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 11:59 pm

Note: This is the third of what will be 13 daily posts on why Barack Obama is a dangerous, objectionable, and objectively unfit candidate to be president of the United States (while many of the other candidates are not). Part 1 (Obama “Part of the Problem” on Fan and Fred) is here. Part 2 (“Energy”) is here.

The daily videos involved are from NeverFindOut.org, a project of Let Freedom Ring (donation link is here).

This post is part of the HOPE ON Project (Help Ohio Prevent Electing Obama Now).

Today’s SOB Alliance author is Pro Ecclesia. Update, 11:15 p.m.: Other SOBers weighing in (this list is not complete) — NixGuy, Right Runner, Return of the Conservatives, One Oar, Buckeye RINO. Norma at Collecting My Thoughts has related thoughts.

__________________________________________________________

Video — “Punished” (direct YouTube link is here):

Transcript — PUNISHED:

WOMAN: Senator Obama, I’m afraid. In March, you told America:

OBAMA: “I’ve got two daughters. If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

WOMAN: Punished. I’m afraid because I’m a mother and I can’t imagine what this country would become if its President could look upon a baby as a punishment. And I’m afraid, because those children that you spoke of as a punishment would be your very own grandchildren.

ANNOUNCER: What happens when we elect a President who has disregard for human life? Please, America, let’s never find out.

++++++++++++++++++++

Pro Ecclesia’s Commentary:

I’ve been pointing out on a regular basis (almost daily, sometimes with several posts per day on the topic) that Sen. Obama is an unfit candidate for the presidency from a pro-life perspective. But, without a doubt, the most comprehensive critique of Sen. Obama’s record on life has come from Princeton Professor Robert P. George. As the Catholic Archbishop of Denver, Charles J. Chaput, recently put it:

Anyone interested in Senator Obama’s record on abortion and related issues should simply read Prof. Robert P. George’s Public Discourse essay from earlier this week, ”Obama’s Abortion Extremism,” and his follow-up article, ”Obama and Infanticide.” They say everything that needs to be said.

In a nutshell, Professor George points out that:

  • Sen. Obama supports legislation that would repeal the Hyde Amendment, which protects pro-life citizens from having to pay for abortions, and which has been credited with saving over a million lives.
  • Sen. Obama has promised that “the first thing I’d do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act“, which would create a federally guaranteed “fundamental right” to abortion through all nine months of pregnancy, including “a right to abort a fully developed child in the final weeks for undefined ‘health’ reasons”, and would abolish virtually every existing state and federal limitation on abortion, including parental consent and notification laws for minors, state and federal funding restrictions on abortion, and conscience protections for pro-life citizens working in the health-care industry.
  • Sen. Obama, unlike even many “pro-choice” legislators, opposed the ban on partial-birth abortions when he served in the Illinois legislature and condemned the Supreme Court decision that upheld legislation banning this heinous practice.
  • Sen. Obama has referred to a baby conceived inadvertently by a young woman as a“punishment” that she should not endure.
  • Sen. Obama has stated that women’s equality requires access to abortion on demand.
  • Sen. Obama wishes to strip federal funding from pro-life crisis pregnancy centers that provide alternatives to abortion for pregnant women in need.
  • Sen. Obama, despite the urging of pro-life members of his own party, has not endorsed or offered support for the Pregnant Women Support Act, the signature bill of Democrats for Life, meant to reduce abortions by providing assistance for women facing crisis pregnancies.
  • Sen. Obama, as an Illinois state senator, opposed legislation to protect children who are born alive, either as a result of an abortionist’s unsuccessful effort to kill them in the womb, or by the deliberate delivery of the baby prior to viability. The Obama campaign lied about his vote until critics produced documentary proof of what he had done. In fact, Sen. Obama continues to lie about his inhuman voting record in regard to the Illinois Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, even stooping so low as to run a disgusting television ad attacking the disabled survivor of a botched abortion.

As Professor George notes, “You may be thinking, it can’t get worse than that. But it does.” Just keep reading.

And Professor George is, of course, 100% correct in concluding that “Barack Obama is the most extreme pro-abortion candidate ever to seek the office of President of the United States.” Let’s not provide Sen. Obama the opportunity to put his anti-life principles into practice. Let’s never find out what it’s like to live in an America with such a man at the helm who deems the least of these our brethren to be an inconvenient “punishment.”

++++++++++++++++++++

BizzyBlog Additional Thoughts:

Legitimate Catholicism and a vote for Barack Obama cannot exist in the same universe. You’re either a Catholic or an Obama supporter. You cannot legitimately be both. It is not arguable. The Catholic vote that makes up roughly 20% of the electorate should be totaly inaccessible to someone with Obama’s beliefs. Update, 9:45 p.m.: To be crystal clear, this is not my opinion. I’m just the messenger. The Catholic Teaching on Abortion is the origin of the message. It is unequivocal, and uncompromising:

II. What are the Catholic Principles of Morality in regard to abortion?

a) FIRST PRINCIPLE: “Any direct attempt on an innocent life as a means to an end – even to the end of saving another life – is unlawful. Innocent human life, in whatsoever condition it is found, is withdrawn, from the very first moment of its existence, from any direct deliberate attack. This is a fundamental right of the human person, which is of universal value in the Christian conception of life; hence as valid for the life still hidden within the womb of the mother, as for the life already born and developing independently of her; as much opposed to direct abortion as to the direct killing of the child before, during or after birth. Whatever foundation there may be for the distinction between these various phases of the development of life born or still unborn, in profane and ecclesiastical law and in certain civil and penal consequences, all these cases involve a grave and unlawful attack upon the inviolability of human life.”Pius XII, Allocution to Large Families, November 26, 1951. (2)

b) SECOND PRINCIPLE: “Every human being, even a child in the mother’s womb has a right to life directly from God and not from the parents or from any society or authority. Hence there is no man, no human authority, no science, no medical, eugenic, social, economic or moral ‘indication’ that can offer or produce a valid juridical title to a direct deliberate disposal of an innocent human life; that is to say, a disposal that aims at its destruction whether as an end or as a means to another end, which is, perhaps, in no way unlawful in itself.”Pius XII, Allocution to Large Families, November 26, 1951.

….. “It must in any case be clearly understood that a Christian can never conform to a law which is in itself immoral and such is the case of a law which would admit, in principle, the licity of abortion. Nor can a Christian take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law, or vote for it. Moreover, he may not collaborate in its application.” Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

If you don’t like what I wrote, your problem isn’t with me, it’s with the Church. Your choices are clear: buy in, or leave the Church. Voting for Obama and leaving the Church is consistent; voting for Obama and claiming to be a member of the Church in good standing is flat-out personal fraud.

Those who believe that Obama will be like Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton, merely playing defense to protect abortion law as it currently (and unacceptably) exists, must disabuse themselves of that notion immediately. Obama has promised to take abortion law to new depths. His past statements and actions make it clear that he means it.

Previous BizzyBlog post:
- Aug. 7 — What a Vote for Obama Means

Positivity: Pancreatic cancer survivor aims to encourage others

Filed under: Positivity — Tom @ 11:55 pm

From Arlington, Texas:

Posted on Mon, Oct. 20, 2008

Next month, it will be 13 years since Dee Pakulski faced a life-threatening disease, and she said every one of those years has been lucky.

The 70-year-old Arlington woman recalled the ordeal she went through in 1995 after she sought help for what she thought was severe heartburn. After a gall bladder operation, an endoscopy procedure and multiple tests, her doctor finally made the diagnosis – she had pancreatic cancer.

Pakulski, who had always exercised and eaten healthy, was in shock when her doctor sent her to see a surgeon for treatment.

Pakulski at that time didn’t know much about the disease and its 99 percent mortality rate but the surgeon’s prognosis was grim. He said there was a chance she would not survive the operation. And if she did survive, it was still unlikely she’d live for more than five years.

Pakulski didn’t like what she heard.

“It was all negative,” she said. “It was all doom and gloom.”

After talking it over with family and friends, she decided she wasn’t giving up. She gathered her courage and went back to the gastroenterologist. She asked him: Please find her the best surgeon in the field. She would be willing to go anywhere. She wanted another opinion.

Her doctor agreed to do some more research. He called her back with names of three doctors with high reputations in treating the disease. all from highly regarded medical centers – one from Baylor Hospital in Dallas, MD Anderson in Houston and the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota.

She made an appointment with the Dallas surgeon.

Pakulski remembers the day she went to his office.

“It was a rainy, dreary day,” she said.

It was Oct. 30, her 57th birthday.

However, on the way into the appointment, she found a $20 bill in the street.

Her husband John said, “Keep it. That’s a good luck piece.”

Turned out, he was right.

This surgeon was optimistic.

After running a series of tests, he noted her overall good health. This factor, combined with his own high success rate, led him to assure her she would survive the operation, definitely beyond a year.

His confidence gave Pakulski what she needed – hope.

“He gave us a whole different outlook,” she said.

She was able to schedule the surgery sooner than expected, and just a week later, Pakulski underwent the operation to have the cancer removed.

While in recovery, she got the good news – the disease was contained. No other treatment was needed.

Today, after more than a decade, Pakulski remains cancer free. Her gastroenterologist refers to her as his “miracle” patient.

Pakulski still gets regular screenings and has honed her lifelong habits of regular exercise and healthy diet, including her own secret power food – a big bowl of fresh fruit every morning. …..

Go here for the rest of the story.

Drudge Notes Network News Nosedive

AnchorsBW1008Matt Drudge, with some apparent glee, given the black and white picture he used, reported something yours truly has followed for some time: The Big Three networks’ evening newscasts continue to lose viewers.

He reports that the numbers, even in a presidential election year, are down from last year:

ELECTION REJECTION: NETWORK NEWS SLUMPS; VIEWERSHIP FADES

….. All 3 evening news shows experienced audience drops year-to-year for the week of Oct. 13-19, 2008.

CBSNEWS w/ Couric shed a half a million viewers, falling from 6.4 million to 5.9 million; ABCNEWS dropped from 8.1 million to 7.6 million; NBCNEWS slumped from 8.2 million to 7.8 million.

Media Bistro’s TV Newser confirms this (Oct. 13-19, 2008, Oct. 15-21, 2007).

Looks like the nets are going to have to come up with the money Team Obama is demanding for Election Night coverage from something other than evening news advertising.

Cross-posted at NewsBusters.org.