Trouble for Obama
Video: Born-alive survivor scolds Obama on vote protecting infanticide
I'm strongly pro-choice myself, and I've always thought that Bill Clinton had it exactly right: The goal should be abortion that is safe, legal, and rare. But it is a mystery to me how it can possibly be legal to withhold care for an infant born alive as the result of a botched abortion procedure. One thing this problem points to, obviously, is abortions that are occurring too damned late. There is a threshold of repugnance that's crossed somewhere, and I thought Roe v. Wade originally demarcated that about as well as it can be done.
Politically, Obama's voting record on this matter has become a back-and-forth about what constitutes infanticide. This is obviously trouble for him, because no one is going to be elected who supports something with that name. Of course, infanticide has been practiced in most human societies, but at least with the excuse of the unavailability of effective contraception and safe methods of abortion. We can hardly claim those excuses. In ancient Greece, unwanted babies were disposed of by "exposure," meaning that they were left on a hillside to die from the elements. By any reasonable definition, that surely qualifies as infanticide. The tragedy of Oedipus begins with him being rescued after his father had left him to die in that way.
If there is a distinction between the Greek practice of infanticide by exposure and the hospital procedure of deliberately neglecting an infant who survives a botched abortion until it dies of dehydration, then someone needs to explain it to me, because I don't see it. If anything, the Greek way could be seen as morally superior because it was faster, and because it allowed for the possibility of rescue.
Obama has a problem here.
Byron
I'm strongly pro-choice myself, and I've always thought that Bill Clinton had it exactly right: The goal should be abortion that is safe, legal, and rare. But it is a mystery to me how it can possibly be legal to withhold care for an infant born alive as the result of a botched abortion procedure. One thing this problem points to, obviously, is abortions that are occurring too damned late. There is a threshold of repugnance that's crossed somewhere, and I thought Roe v. Wade originally demarcated that about as well as it can be done.
Politically, Obama's voting record on this matter has become a back-and-forth about what constitutes infanticide. This is obviously trouble for him, because no one is going to be elected who supports something with that name. Of course, infanticide has been practiced in most human societies, but at least with the excuse of the unavailability of effective contraception and safe methods of abortion. We can hardly claim those excuses. In ancient Greece, unwanted babies were disposed of by "exposure," meaning that they were left on a hillside to die from the elements. By any reasonable definition, that surely qualifies as infanticide. The tragedy of Oedipus begins with him being rescued after his father had left him to die in that way.
If there is a distinction between the Greek practice of infanticide by exposure and the hospital procedure of deliberately neglecting an infant who survives a botched abortion until it dies of dehydration, then someone needs to explain it to me, because I don't see it. If anything, the Greek way could be seen as morally superior because it was faster, and because it allowed for the possibility of rescue.
Obama has a problem here.
Byron
posted by Byron | Tuesday, September 16, 2008
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home