Barack Obama vs Unborn Children
by Dr. Dominic Dixon
The success of Obama does not lie in becoming America’s first black President or being one of the youngest. His success lies in successfully fulfilling God’s will in his life. For if Obama is a confessing Christian, then his ultimate goal is God’s will and purpose being fulfilled in his life.
The leader of the world’s most powerful nation has to make critical choices and those choices will need to have a moral framework. The reason why I declare the term ‘moral framework’ is simply because in order for a person to make a ‘Right’ or ‘Wrong’ decision, it has to be his or her ‘moral decision’.
There are many sociological and psychological issues that would need to be addressed. President Barack Obama is by far the most pro-abortionist President in the history of America.
During his political career, Barack Obama has consistently voted against innocent preborn children. He has repeatedly voted to deny basic medical care to babies who survive late-term abortions, and voted against efforts to end the gruesome partial-birth abortion procedure. As a candidate for president, Senator Obama had pledged to sign the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) which would override any and all restrictions on abortion throughout nine months of pregnancy. It would also force taxpayers to fund abortion-on-demand.
Of equal concern is Senator Obama’s pledge to appoint only judges who support Roe v. Wade, which could effectively impose the death penalty on future generations of America’s innocent unborn children.
In addition, pro-abortion Democrats retained control of the US Senate and House of Representatives. Undoubtedly, American citizens can expect a radical pro-abortion agenda from its newly elected leaders. 
Obama's record on abortion is extreme. He opposed the ban on partial-birth abortion -- a practice a fellow Democrat, the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, once called "too close to infanticide." Obama strongly criticized the Supreme Court decision upholding the partial-birth ban. In the Illinois state Senate, he opposed a bill similar to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which prevents the killing of infants mistakenly left alive by abortion. And now Obama has oddly claimed that he would not want his daughters to be "punished with a baby" because of a crisis pregnancy -- hardly a welcoming attitude toward new life. 
Recently, there was a speculation about India being affected with the new presidency in the context of abortion. Many feared that India may be forced or bought into signing a treaty in exchange for international policies. There was one speculation that India was awarded the PL 480 agreement only after Mrs. Indira Gandhi agreed to legalize abortion. [PL 480 is a food for peace program] The PL 480 was brought to India during the 1950's and again in the mid 1960's when India was on the verge of a famine.
In India, the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act of 1971, which went into effect on 1 April 1972, significantly liberalized abortion laws in India. Prior to enactment of the legislation, the Indian Penal Code (Act No. 45 of 1860) permitted abortion only when it was justified for the good faith purpose of saving the life of the woman. Article 312 of the Penal Code provided that any person performing an illegal abortion was subject to imprisonment for three years and/or payment of a fine; if the woman was "quick with child", the punishment was imprisonment for up to seven years and payment of a fine. The same penalty applied to a woman who induced her own miscarriage. 
India has it own sets of rules on abortion and has legalized abortion in different contexts such as population control, pregnancy of a minor, pregnancy of a lunatic, etc. However, in India, our laws are quite subjective with limitations to abortions in the context of "sex determination tests".
In India, some families would rather have a son than a daughter. So when it is possible to determine the sex of the child, many women do the test, or are forced to do the test, and then made to kill the child if it is a girl. This is known as female foeticide, and to prevent this from happening (as abortion is legal so foeticide is not a crime necessarily) a law was passed which made having an abortion after being aware of the sex of the child, a crime. It is also a crime to do a particular test called the amniocentesis test, which is a test largely to determine the sex of the child.
There are 927 females to 1000 males in India right now, which indicates that in spite of preventive measures abortion of the female foetus, and female infanticide is still taking place.
Why is female infanticide still taking place? It is because the government has chosen to kill the unborn child! The government has legalized abortion thus faces the consequences of it’s own decision.
In the view of conscience and moral choices, the issue of Pro-Life vs Pro-abortion must arise and has arisen and is a major issue. How can we prevent our young people from unwanted pregnancies if we keep supplying them with contraceptives instead of abstinence education? How can we prevent the homicide of the unborn if we do not educate our children?
Will Obama contribute to human life or will he destroy the weak and the unborn? Will he remember what John F. Kennedy the 35th President said? "I am certain that after the dust of centuries has passed over our cities, we too will be remembered not for victories or defeats in battle or in politics, but for our contribution to the human spirit."
In the context of freedom, many have devised pluralistic and liberal lifestyles, be it individuals, communities and even nations. It was Herbert Hoover the 31st President that said "Freedom is the open window through which pours the sunlight of the human spirit and human dignity." Whatever our definitions of freedom are, it must protect human dignity in EQUALITY, be it born or unborn as Harry S. Truman, the 33rd President said "We believe that all men are created equal because they are created in the image of God."
When we see the decline in America’s morality that is reflected in their policies, would a thinker say that the 40th President, Ronald Reagan was wrong in his statement? "America has begun a spiritual reawakening. Faith and hope are being restored. Americans are turning back to God. Church attendance is up. Audiences for religious books and broadcasts are growing. And I do believe that he has begun to heal our blessed land."
We pray that President Barack Obama, the 44th President of America, will change his stand on being a pro-abortionist and reside with the conviction of being a pro-lifer. If Obama has taken the pro-abortion decision just to get to where he is and is thereby compromising, he should remember what President Ronald Reagan prophetically said: "If some among you fear taking a stand because you are afraid of reprisals from customers, clients, or even government, recognize that you are just feeding the crocodile hoping he'll eat you last."
In conclusion, this is what Ronald Reagan had to say about abortion is his statement titled "Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation" 
- We cannot diminish the value of one category of human life — the unborn — without diminishing the value of all human life.
- If you don't know whether a body is alive or dead, you would never bury it. I think this consideration itself should be enough for all of us to insist on protecting the unborn.
- Regrettably, we live at a time when some persons do not value all human life. They want to pick and choose which individuals have value.
- As a nation, we must choose between the sanctity of life ethic and the "quality of life" ethic. I have no trouble identifying the answer our nation has always given to this basic question, and the answer that I hope and pray it will give in the future.
- As a nation today, we have not rejected the sanctity of human life. The American people have not had an opportunity to express their view on the sanctity of human life in the unborn. I am convinced that Americans do not want to play God with the value of human life. It is not for us to decide who is worthy to live and who is not. Even the Supreme Court's opinion in Roe v. Wade did not explicitly reject the traditional American idea of intrinsic worth and value in all human life; it simply dodged this issue.
- We must all educate ourselves to the reality of the horrors taking place. Doctors today know that unborn children can feel a touch within the womb and that they respond to pain.
- Late-term abortions, especially when the baby survives, but is then killed by starvation, neglect, or suffocation, show once again the link between abortion and infanticide. The time to stop both is now.
- We will never recognize the true value of our own lives until we affirm the value in the life of others.
- We cannot survive as a free nation when some men decide that others are not fit to live and should be abandoned to abortion or infanticide. My Administration is dedicated to the preservation of America as a free land, and there is no cause more important for preserving that freedom than affirming the transcendent right to life of all human beings, the right without which no other rights have any meaning.
E-mail this article to a friend
Copyright © Dr. Dominic Dixon. All rights reserved.