Why The Gianna Jessen 'Botched Abortion' Ad Is Inaccurate

We are hearing of more and more babies who are younger than Gianna Jessen's 7 months surviving and thriving! Their have been babies born to mothers who were less than 6 months pregnant--yet the children are also thriving. ALL children who are born alive ARE viable in God's eyes. Abortionists like to play at being God--they seem to thrive on being 'THE' person, (though only mere mortals)to grant life or take it away. If a child survives the sickening atrocity of being burned alive by chemicals, or some other gruesome abortion,she should not be tortured again by being stabbed, suffocated, strangulation, or dumped in a barrel to await death. All children who survive abortion by some miracle, or blessing deserve to be protected by the laws of this great country. Any child killed after being born alive is infanticide--viability has nothing to do with it.

Or are you like most pro-lifers in that you are all for regulation and laws, but won't give up a penny or lift a finger yourself to help?

Spoken like somebody who couldn't be bothered to look in the phone book under "Crisis Pregnancy Center".

Steve,

I'm writing as executive director of BornAliveTruth.org, the originator of the Gianna ad.

Jessen said in the ad, "if Barack Obama had his way, I wouldn't be here."

She did not say, "If Illinois law had its way...." or for that matter, "If California law had its way."

Jessen's statement had nothing to do with IL or CA law. It focused squarely on Barack Obama and his strong opposition to giving legal status to abortion survivors and providing them medical care.

Have you read Obama's 2001 and 2002 floor speeches from the IL Born Alive Infants Protection Act debate? Have you perused Obama's website?

If so you would read irrefutable evidence of Obama's disregard for the postnatal personhood of abortion survivors.

For instance, there is this from Obama's own "factcheck" page about an earlier component of IL's Born Alive Act, demonstrating he clearly does not believe abortion survivors like Jessen warrant legal or medical protection:

(And if that graphic from Obama's site does not show up when my comment goes live, it reads: "Language Clearly Threatening Roe: (c) A live child born as a result of an abortion shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law.")

Given merely the above, how could one determine any other than Obama believes killing abortion survivors like Jessen at birth is nothing more than 4th trimester abortions?

Nevertheless, I will explain why one would be incorrect to hinge one's defense of Obama in this case on IL abortion law.

My information comes from attorney Paul Linton, who repesented the American Academy of Medical Ethics when 15 years ago it opposed the US District Court's decision to enjoin much of IL's Abortion Act of 1975.

One section of the IL Abortion Act enjoined in the 1993 Herbst v. O'Malley decision included the definitions of "born alive," "live born," and "live birth."

To restate, there was no enforceable definition of "born alive" in IL law when Obama opposed IL's Born Alive Infants Protection Act.

The IL Born Alive Act would have restored that language. By opposing Born Alive, Obama was agreeing with the Herbst decision that an infant born alive as the result of an abortion should not be protected by the IL Criminal Code.

Further, there are 2 loopholes in the IL Abortion Act.

1. The IL Abortion Act applies only to viable infants, as you stated, while Born Alive applies to all live-born infants, regardless of viability. In other words, the former dealt with viability, the latter with live birth. Thus, in the case of the live birth of a child who was determined not to be viable at the time the abortion was committed, the 1975 law did not apply.

2. The one determining a baby's viability according to the IL Abortion Act is the abortionist, and s/he is allowed to determine viability pre-birth. Rational people, as you stated, understand the potential for the very person trying to kill the baby pre-birth to subjectively assess the baby's likelihood of survival post-birth.

That said, the IL Abortion Act states that in the event the abortionist determines a baby s/he is trying to kill might survive and might be viable, s/he was to call a 2nd doctor to assess the abortion survivor at birth.

And in this audio clip from Obama's 2002 IL Senate floor debate, he argued against making that very call, stating doing so would be a "burden" to the aborting mother's "original decision." Hear for yourself:

(If the above mp3 does not work when my comment goes live, hear it at www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/08/baipaobamamp3.html.)

Regards,

Jill Stanek

I was particularly impressed by the clarity of Jill Stanek's explanations. Thanks Jill, the detail was very instructive.

Jill said, "2. The one determining a baby's viability according to the IL Abortion Act is the abortionist, and s/he is allowed to determine viability pre-birth."

So the Illinois law already allowed viability of the baby to be determined pre-birth.

However, from Obama's own web site http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/08/19/fact_check_born_alive_1.php
Obama said, “Whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or other elements of the Constitution, we’re saying they are persons entitled to the kinds of protections provided to a child, a 9-month-old child delivered to term…That determination then essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place.”

Logically then Obama was saying that a determination of pre-viability of the baby would forbid abortions, but he would have known as Jill outlined, that the Illinois law permitted the abortionist to determine pre-viability. Where does this leave Obama? Clearly he espouses that the abortionist shouldn't even follow the permissions allowed in Illinois law to save a viable baby. Obama doesn't want a finding of pre-viability by the abortionist. Then in a decision which ensures that the baby is either killed or left to die, Obama voted 4 times against legislation affording protection to born alive infants, which if enacted, would have preserved a life, a living beating heart. It would also have sent a strong message and onus on the abortionist to comply with the IL law and honestly make a determination of pre-viability pre-birth as the law already required (but wan't being adhered to). The Infant Protects Act would have necessitated the second physician to enter the room and provide an assessment of viability without the burden of conflict of interest that guides the decision making of the abortionist.

Jill thanks for pointing out the detail of what Obama really meant and actions he took. It's is very useful to check the public record of Obama given he is standing for public office and the protection of viable babies is at stake.

Well done Gianna on your courageous stand and inspired leadership on issues of life and thank you for your integrity and highest regard for life and the human person. Thank you too for journeying to Australia recently and inspiring many in our nation.

Edward Dabrowski
Federal Director
Shared Parenting Council of Australia

What does this have to do with Senator Obama. What about Ms. Jessen mother. She should take the responsibility for this botched abortion. She is the one who was being selfish for not wanting her child to live. People are always wanting to blame someone else for their mistakes. If her mother didn't want to have a baby she should not have gotten pregnant. People are so selfish, and that is what Senator Obama stresses at his convention speech, we need to take some responsibility for our actions ourselves. The president has no authority over abortions, these matters are taken up by the Supreme Court. They are the ones who would rule on issues like these. Please stop trying to blame everyting on Mr. Obama and take responsibility for our own mishaps and botches in life. Blame your mama, she is the one who did it. OK!

Thank you Wally Watson for saying: "The point is that ALL abortion is anethema to our Holy God!"

EACH ONE
d. severy copyright © 2005

Each one a mystery, a labyrinth untold.
Steeped now in secrecy, but ready to unfold.
No man knows, save He who rose:
What tale will be told, o let my people go.

Perfection went away, leaving us to groan.
Blood poured upon the earth, o how man does roam.
Far from the Way he knew, far from the Way of Truth;
O the tales been told, o let my people go.

Though hid from pedant’s* eye, each one is foreknown;
Destined to live and die, then no more to roam.
Cut not short their destiny, they for life were meant to be
Tales to be told, o let my people go.

Small though their bodies are, each one has great worth.
With silent cries they cross the bar, denied their first birth.
Ushered into Holy Light, before the Father and the Christ,
There to tell the tale, yet no more to weep or wail,
Lest they weep o for thee, o let my people go.

It’s we who should weep and wail, we who must tell the tale,
Crimes yet undone should not prevail, this must be the goal.
Warn now, I warn you well, your soul may be bound for hell,
It’s murder and must be told, o let my people go.

*pedant: in this case, one who is unimaginative or who unduly emphasizes minutiae in the presentation or use of knowledge