Inspiring story: a baby born alive through abortion, told by that baby herself, 31 yrs later

In case you haven’t had a chance to hear this incredible woman’s story, which she told to an audience in Australia on Sept. 8, 2008, I strongly encourage you to spend 16 minutes to hear her via these two YouTube videos:

Gianna Jessen’s story, part 1

Gianna Jessen’s story, part 2

I know that abortion may be the last topic that voters may feel comfortable discussing, especially in the context of the upcoming elections. Thank God that, as Gianna says in her own eloquent words, she is out there “blazing through the world, offering hope.”

Not Obama-style hope. Real hope.

Hope for children, who, like she says of herself, are “hated from conception.” Hope that the inroads that have been made to defend the life of the unborn will be just the very beginning of a great trail to be blazed. Hope that our next president will stand firm in these children’s defense.

In 2002, Pres. Bush signed into law the “Born-Alive Infants Protection Act” that Gianna refers to in the first video. This law, thank God, ensures that these children, born amidst adversity and, yes, unwanted by their parents, will not be smothered, strangled, or tossed away like an infected organ after a transplant. This law ensures that all children born alive in this country will receive all the rights of protection and health care that any other human being in our great country is guaranteed.

Had Barack Obama been president when this arrived at his desk in the Oval Office, he most surely would have vetoed this law.

What would make me suggest such a hideous thing? Surely, I don’t believe that Sen. Obama believes in “infanticide?” That he supports the murder of children?

As a citizen of the proud state of Illinois, I wish that he hadn’t supported murder of these children, born in these cases. But, in fact, when a “Born-Alive Infants Protection Bill” was presented in the Illinois State Senate in 2001, he was the only senator to rise to speak against the bill. This is not “spin.” These are his words. He said:

I just want to suggest … that this is probably not going to survive constitutional scrutiny. Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we’re really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a – child, a 9-month-old – child that was delivered to term. …

I mean, it – it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an anti-abortion statute. For that purpose, I think it would probably be found unconstitutional.

He voted “present” (essentially the same as voting “no”) in 2001. He alone spoke against a revised version of this bill again in 2002, and again voted “present.” In 2003, he finally voted “no,” and defeated the bill in Illinois.

Meanwhile, in the U.S. Senate, similar testimony had been heard, and even the likes of Sen. Barbara Boxer and Sen. Ted Kennedy (generally outspoken supporters of abortion rights) stood up for this bill. By the time that Sen. Obama arrived in the U.S. Senate, this was the law of the land, and in 2005, finally Illinois would ratify an essentially identical bill.

Sen. Obama has made various claims to explain his opposition to this bill, most notably that there were already laws on the books in Illinois that granted this protection. However, there were enough loopholes in the laws that nurses testified (in front of Sen. Obama) about children they saw left to die or killed specifically in these situations. This is how the bill was brought about in the first place; if there weren’t concerns in Illinois among ethical medical providers, the bill wouldn’t have been submitted to committee at all!

If you happen to be someone who believe that Roe v. Wade must not be overturned, let me assure you that this law truly has nothing to do with the right to an abortion. This law gives rights only to the newborn. No impact on the abortionist nor on the woman seeking the abortion.

It has been reported that there is an ad that may play in certain markets, sharing this story in 30 seconds or less. I wholly encourage you to share these links with others, Obama supporters or McCain supporters.

Only Sen. McCain has firmly committed himself to stand up for the rights of the unborn, as Pres. Bush did. I encourage you to ask yourself, and to ask others, if you could possibly vote for Sen. Obama, who said on the floor of the Illinois Senate that Gianna Jessen did not deserve to be treated as a human being, just because she was not a full-term baby. Doesn’t that give even the most staunch Obama-supporter pause?

I hope and pray that it does.

Our country needs a McCain presidency for so many reasons.

The life of Gianna Jessen is one bright, shining example.

Let’s not see how many fewer bright, shining examples there might be with Sen. Obama in the White House, continuing to do all in his power to stand in the way of the rights of the “unwanted” to be born!

P. S. In case this issue got under your skin, as it did mine, you might be interested in the following links:

Obama’s 10 Cited Reasons for Opposing the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act

Gianna Jessen ad exerpt and interview on Hannity & Colmes

FactCheck.org’s synopsis of Obama’s history on the Born-Alive Infant Protection issue

Trending on Redstate Video