What business does the Pentagon have stocking the morning-after pill? It's more Obama than the Pentagon. There is no form of abortion that our pro-abort community organizer-in-chief does not like. But remember - don't question his faith:
From the
Washington Post via
memeorandum:
The Department of Defense will begin making the morning-after pill Plan B available at all of its hospitals and health clinics around the world, officials announced Thursday.
The decision came after a recommendation by the Pentagon's Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee, an advisory panel that voted in November to include Plan B and the generic Next Choice on the list of drugs all military facilities should stock. The Pentagon accepted the recommendation Feb. 3, a spokeswoman said.
The decision is the latest the Obama administration has made reversing politically sensitive policies involving women's health that were implemented during President George W. Bush's administration.
It's not women's health, it's abortion that kills women too.
Previously, the Obama administration has announced that it was rescinding a federal regulation that would have expanded the ability of health-care workers to refuse to provide medical care they found morally objectionable, including abortion and Plan B; has lifted federal restrictions on human embryonic stem cell research; and has restored funding to international family-planning groups that abort babies.
Women's abortion health advocates had long been pushing the Obama administration to allow the sale of the morning-after pill at military facilities. The same panel made a similar recommendation in 2002, but the policy was never implemented.
It's all about abortion for Obama. There is no life worth saving to him. Here in the States, most of us believe what our founding fathers believed, that all have unalienable rights, the most fundamental of which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Our Founding Fathers were wise to put those 3 in that sequence since you can't pursue happiness without liberty, and can't have liberty without life. Thus, life is the prime unalienable right of all human being. But Obama does not believe this. Once again, for the umpteenth time, on Obama and abortion, it is indisputable that in his very short time in office,
the most viciously pro-abort zealot to ever sit in the Oval Office did the following:
The multiple pro-infanticide votes are the most egregious of the above egregious acts, and he did so without any pity for those babies born alive only to be left in soiled linen closets to die. In 2002, as an Illinois legislator, Obama voted against the Induced Infant Liability Act, which would have protected babies that survived late-term abortions.
Obama voted against this bill in the Illinois senate and killed it in committee. Twice, the Induced Infant Liability Act came up in the Judiciary Committee on which he served. At its first reading he voted “
present.” At the second he voted “
no.” The bill was then referred to the senate’s Health and Human Services Committee, which Obama chaired after the Illinois Senate went Democratic in 2003.
As chairman, he never called the bill up for a vote. That last part was a defacto "no" vote. More than the above is the shocking personal account of nurse Jill Stanek who witnessed surviving babies being left to die in soiled linens:
Jill Stanek, a registered delivery-ward nurse who was the prime mover behind the legislation after she witnessed aborted babies’ being born alive and left to die, testified twice before Obama in support of the Induced Infant Liability Act bills. She also testified before the U.S. Congress in support of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.
Stanek told me her testimony “did not faze” Obama.
In the second hearing, Stanek said, “I brought pictures in and presented them to the committee of very premature babies from my neonatal resuscitation book from the American Pediatric Association, trying to show them unwanted babies were being cast aside. Babies the same age were being treated if they were wanted!”
“And those pictures didn’t faze him [Obama] at all,” she said.
Out of sight, out of mind. Quite a telling reaction for the President with a heart "
bigger than any heart in the world." There is neither hope nor change in soiled linen closets.
Andrew McCarthy had a great piece at the NRO last year on Obama, his voting against infants born alive, and the lies he told to cover it up later:
There wasn’t any question about what was happening. The abortions were going wrong. The babies weren’t cooperating. They wouldn’t die as planned. Or, as Illinois state senator Barack Obama so touchingly put it, there was “movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just coming out limp and dead.”
No, Senator. They wouldn’t go along with the program. They wouldn’t just come out limp and dead.
They were coming out alive. Born alive. Babies. Vulnerable human beings Obama, in his detached pomposity, might otherwise include among “the least of my brothers.” But of course, an abortion extremist can’t very well be invoking Saint Matthew, can he? So, for Obama, the shunning of these least of our brothers and sisters — millions of them — is somehow not among America’s greatest moral failings.
Most of us, of course, opt for “child,” particularly when the “it” is born and living and breathing and in need of our help. Particularly when the “it” is clinging not to guns or religion but to life.
But not Barack Obama. As an Illinois state senator, he voted to permit infanticide. And now, running for president, he banks on media adulation to insulate him from his past.
The record, however, doesn’t lie.
Stanek encountered another nurse carrying the child to a “soiled utility room” where it would be left to die. It wasn’t that unusual. The induced-labor method was used for late-term abortions. Many of the babies were strong enough to survive the delivery. At least for a time.
So something had to be done with them. They couldn’t be left out in the open, struggling in the presence of fellow human beings. After all, those fellow human beings — health-care providers — would then be forced to confront the inconvenient question of why they were standing idly by. That would hold a mirror up to the whole grisly business.
Better the utility room. Alone, out of sight and out of mind. Next case.
Stanek’s account enraged the public and shamed into silence most of the country’s staunchest pro-abortion activists. Most, not all. Not Barack Obama.
In the Illinois senate, he opposed Born-Alive tooth and nail.
The shocking extremism of that position — giving infanticide the nod over compassion and life — is profoundly embarrassing to him now. So he has lied about what he did. He has offered various conflicting explanations, ranging from the assertion that he didn’t oppose the anti-infanticide legislation (he did), to the assertion that he opposed it because it didn’t contain a superfluous clause reaffirming abortion rights (it did), to the assertion that it was unnecessary because Illinois law already protected the children of botched abortions (it didn’t — and even if it arguably did, why oppose a clarification?).
What Obama hasn’t offered, however, is the rationalization he vigorously posited during the 2002 Illinois senate debate.
When it got down to brass tacks, Barack Obama argued that protecting abortion doctors from legal liability was more important than protecting living infants from death.
Don’t take my word for it. There’s a transcript of a state senate debate, which took place on April 4, 2002. That transcript is available here ... After being recognized, Obama challenged the Born-Alive bill’s sponsor...
As Obama spoke these words, he well knew that children were being born alive but precisely not looked after by the abortion doctors whose water the senator was carrying. As Stanek put it, as many as one in five — twenty percent — were left to die. That was what prompted the legislation in the first place.
Through Obama’s radical prism, everything “is about abortion and not live births.” But in reality, this had nothing to do with “burden[ing] the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion.” It was about the legal and moral responsibilities of doctors and nurses in circumstances where, despite that decision, a living human being was delivered.
Obama wasn’t worried about “the least of my brothers,” the child. He agitated, instead, over “what liabilities the doctor might have in this situation.” And what kind of doctor? A charlatan who would somehow “continue to think that it’s nonviable” notwithstanding that “there’s, let’s say, movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just coming out limp and dead.”
Given the choice between the charlatan and “that fetus, or child — however you want to describe it,” Barack Obama went with the charlatan. The baby would end up limp and dead, whether in the operating room or the utility closet. It was, Obama insisted, about abortion, not live births.
Read the whole thing. It is devastating for Obama. Unfortunately, it is not devastating
to Obama. That's the result of a conscience seared shut.It is the seared conscience of Obama, his speechwriters, staff and the media that they do not see the hypocrisy and irony of their own words and arguments in being for innocent life, while at eth same time being against it.
