Notice God's unutterable waste of saints, according to the judgment of the world. God plants His saints in the most useless places. We say - God intends me to be here because I am so useful. Jesus never estimated His life along the line of the greatest use. God puts His saints where they will glorify Him, and we are no judges at all of where that is. ~Oswald Chambers, My Utmost For His Highest, August 10
2 comments:
Some food for thought on why a Christian man would vote against a bill. I think as Christians we should do our research before putting the cart before the horse. I remember voting for George Bush simply because my pastor at the time told us too...in many such words, I swore after all that has happened I would not let that happen again. I am not against you, I am simply hoping that we as Christians will be intelligent about our decisions in this election.
Have a good day!
often bills will be voted against and fail because of amendments or small clauses that the general public and many members of Congress are not aware of. For example: Katrina Aid was held up because Congresspeople were adding on their own side projects which the general Congress did not want to approve, so the bill has to be reintroduced.
In Illinois, many other states, and at the federal level, the "Born Alive" bill was introduced stating that a child is breathing or moving then it is alive. This seems hardly required and is as silly as a congressperson asking the quorum to vote on whether or not 2+2 = 4. If a baby is breathing and moving it is alive by standards going back to the beginning of time, no bill is needed. So why have the bill at all???
No matter what a doctor's position is on abortion, it is a difficult procedure to endure. This procedure would be even more difficult if the doctor had to fear legal repercussions from all parties. Those people could include: Parents of the mother, boyfriend/spouses,etc.
The "Born Alive" act included a small clause which stated that if a infant was born after an attempted abortion and is alive then legal action could be taken against the doctor. You might equate it to suing your contractor if your house isn't built to code (not the same but you get the point).
Obama as well as many other realized that if this act passed, then doctors would refuse to perform abortions and their malpractice insurance would skyrocket. We have seen frivolous lawsuits push many good doctors out of business and this would do the same.
Delete
Additionally as a constitutional scholar, Obama realized that this would have weakened Roe v. Wade. If you disagree with the law that is fine and go make effort to change it but you and I must follow the law and Obama and other sworn officials must uphold the law.
This type of political game has been played for as long as there has been politics and this is just another attempt. A look at the congressional roll sheet shows that this bill was introduced federally in 2000 as well (3 years before Obama was in the U.S. Senate). There is no need to provide rights to a living being, those rights (as stated in our Declaration of Independence) are given by our creator. This bill was just an attempt by political sleaze balls to cast congresspeople who actually read the bill and did the common sense thing as baby killers.
Thank you, Melissa, for your challenge to be intelligent. Unfortunately, this reasoning is psuedo-intelligent.
1. Why was a bill needed? Because babies that were living, breathing, and moving were left to die unattended without even comfort measures. An "abortion" procedure, which simply induced labor and then left the live baby to die was being practiced throughout the country.
2. Obama voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act THREE TIMES.
3. As the chairman of the senate committe to which the bill was sent, Obama blocked the EXACT wording from being introduced that passed unanimously at the Federal level a year later. (All pro-choice politicians including Biden, Clinton, Edwards, and Kennedy voted for the BAIPA!)
4. Here is the exact wording of the BAIPA: http://www.nrlc.org/Federal/Born_Alive_Infants/Baipatext.pdf
There is no clause about being able to sue your doctor. However, why shouldn't you if the doctor lets a living person die? (And of course you should be able to sue your contractor if your house isn't built to code!)
5. As a "constitutional scholar" Obama should know that it is NOT his job to "uphold the law." That is the job of the judicial branch of government. He is in the legislative branch which has authority to make new laws and change bad ones.
For some real some real "food for thought" try this:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51121
Post a Comment