Active Users:689 Time:16/09/2026 04:11:43 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Links: Narg Send a noteboard - 27/10/2012 12:51:12 AM
Here is the 2001 proposed legislation opposed by Obama:

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/legisnet92/summary/920SB1095.html

2002 proposed legislation opposed by Obama:

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/legisnet92/sbgroups/sb/920SB1093LV.html

2003 proposed legislation opposed by Obama:

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=09300SB1082&GA=93&SessionId=3&DocTypeId=SB&LegID=3910&DocNum=1082&GAID=3&Session=

Note the amended language (you can click a link on the page to see it) puts in the same langauge placed in the bill passed by the US congres to ensure that this doesn't give any human rights to an unborn fetus. Obama still opposed it. His comments for opposing the 2003 legislation are not on the record, but his reasons for opposing the 2001 and 2002 legislation regarded fears about limiting abortion.
A little learning is a dangerous thing.
This message last edited by Narg on 27/10/2012 at 12:51:27 AM
Reply to message
God Distances Self From Christian Right Joel - 26/10/2012 01:56:18 PM 1541 Views
Do you really think God would condone abortion? *NM* Dark Knight - 26/10/2012 03:28:25 PM 490 Views
Depends on when a fetus is a being, which the GOP contends is "at the moment of fertilization." Joel - 26/10/2012 03:57:44 PM 826 Views
Actually, I don't see any place in the Bible where God is.... Jeordam - 26/10/2012 04:00:19 PM 1013 Views
Where did I say one word about God accommodating our sin? Joel - 26/10/2012 05:55:52 PM 856 Views
You're technically right, Joel, but... Tom - 26/10/2012 07:32:10 PM 859 Views
Almost may count in hand grenades, but definitely not in canon. Joel - 26/10/2012 10:28:57 PM 932 Views
Your lack of scientific understanding is everything in this instance. Jeordam - 26/10/2012 10:44:05 PM 868 Views
Because whether God intends rape is aaaall about science, right? Joel - 26/10/2012 11:08:16 PM 765 Views
You're getting rather emphatic. Jeordam - 26/10/2012 11:27:07 PM 821 Views
Broad fundamental change to US law by controlling all three branches of government provokes that. Joel - 27/10/2012 12:44:59 AM 858 Views
That's a dangerous stance to take as a Christian Tom - 27/10/2012 01:11:14 AM 856 Views
I agree it is good reading; that does not make it binding. Joel - 27/10/2012 01:37:20 AM 856 Views
Jesus that Greek sounds weird to my ears. Dan - 27/10/2012 03:43:40 AM 956 Views
It's really just simplified Attic. Tom - 27/10/2012 06:11:48 AM 834 Views
Condemn women to die? What a strange way to look at this. Narg - 26/10/2012 07:17:16 PM 882 Views
women *did* die before abortion was legalized, there should be no dispute of this aspect moondog - 26/10/2012 07:27:28 PM 924 Views
So we legalize an illegal act because some are willing to harm themselves to do it? *NM* Narg - 26/10/2012 10:02:37 PM 467 Views
no, we legalize the act so that it can be performed safely without killing both mother *and* child *NM* moondog - 26/10/2012 11:08:52 PM 460 Views
At least you acknowledge it as a child. *NM* Jeordam - 26/10/2012 11:28:30 PM 474 Views
Very good point, but that was not (at least soley) what I meant, no. Joel - 26/10/2012 11:12:32 PM 825 Views
If something should be illegal in its own right, it is nonsense to legalize it because criminals Narg - 26/10/2012 11:40:41 PM 853 Views
If banning it saves no lives but inevitably takes more, the ban is counterproductive. Joel - 27/10/2012 12:48:51 AM 909 Views
That is absolutely absurd. It saves the lives of all... Narg - 27/10/2012 12:59:16 AM 901 Views
you're still missing the point that abortions will still be performed if it were illegal moondog - 27/10/2012 01:02:57 AM 839 Views
I'm not missing the point, you are. Narg - 27/10/2012 01:21:39 AM 960 Views
This isn't necessarily true, though it is often due to other factors. nossy - 27/10/2012 02:48:00 PM 859 Views
People who want abortions badly enough to have one will, whether or not law makes it "convenient." Joel - 27/10/2012 02:58:52 AM 808 Views
You're stuck. Narg - 27/10/2012 07:07:36 AM 951 Views
not entirely nossy - 27/10/2012 03:23:07 PM 957 Views
Give me facts, not supposition. Joel - 27/10/2012 04:10:57 PM 869 Views
Telling a woman whose life was in danger not to save it with abortion condemned her to die Joel - 26/10/2012 10:48:53 PM 799 Views
There is no proof that you would accept that a fetus is a child. Narg - 26/10/2012 11:31:50 PM 797 Views
Fantastic question. Jeordam - 26/10/2012 11:43:51 PM 825 Views
No, I would err on the side of caution; have often said as much in just those words. Joel - 27/10/2012 01:18:19 AM 821 Views
Sure there is; show me a fetus acting indepedently and consciously. Joel - 27/10/2012 01:15:00 AM 882 Views
Perfect example of media sensationalism Palatine - 26/10/2012 04:13:41 PM 940 Views
I agree with your larger point and am not trying to be argumentative Sareitha Sedai - 26/10/2012 04:29:23 PM 871 Views
yeah, but what do women know about women's issues? this is man talk time! moondog - 26/10/2012 05:01:58 PM 845 Views
THAT is the whole problem with his comment. Joel - 26/10/2012 05:59:40 PM 808 Views
Or it could mean.... Jeordam - 26/10/2012 11:50:53 PM 854 Views
Re: Or it could mean.... moondog - 27/10/2012 12:14:31 AM 830 Views
Having addressed this in response to Legolas in moondogs thread on Mourdock, I will just link that. Joel - 27/10/2012 01:43:48 AM 855 Views
I agree nossy - 26/10/2012 07:27:21 PM 925 Views
It's always a slippery slope, talking about what God did and did not intend. Legolas - 27/10/2012 12:06:22 AM 863 Views
Yes nossy - 27/10/2012 02:20:46 AM 892 Views
There is a logically consistent way; you did not ask for it, so I will be brief. Joel - 27/10/2012 02:53:09 AM 880 Views
I suppose it is splitting hairs. Palatine - 27/10/2012 04:32:43 PM 835 Views
Pregnancy cannot be separated from its cause. Joel - 26/10/2012 05:51:28 PM 867 Views
Re: Pregnancy cannot be separated from its cause. Cannoli - 27/10/2012 01:17:04 AM 884 Views
Who said anything about denying them funds? Joel - 27/10/2012 01:54:39 AM 903 Views
God intends everything. Palatine - 27/10/2012 04:40:58 PM 943 Views
"Intends" is a big word. Joel - 27/10/2012 09:23:13 PM 853 Views
Re: "Intends" is a big word. Palatine - 29/10/2012 04:56:49 PM 839 Views
I am familiar with the Problem of Evil. Joel - 29/10/2012 06:41:13 PM 842 Views
Absolutely agree. *NM* Legolas - 26/10/2012 11:47:04 PM 435 Views
It is sad that this is getting more press than the Bengazi scandal *NM* random thoughts - 26/10/2012 05:58:22 PM 449 Views
that's probably because it's more relevant to most people's lives *NM* moondog - 26/10/2012 06:06:10 PM 453 Views
It is sad partisanship trumps policy for so many. Joel - 26/10/2012 10:52:34 PM 774 Views
This entire scandal really speaks to the Calvinist heresy in particular. Tom - 26/10/2012 07:10:38 PM 823 Views
I was trying REALLY hard to avoid putting it in precisely those terms. Joel - 26/10/2012 10:12:17 PM 866 Views
Well, but really, the fundamental crux of the issue is precisely that. Tom - 27/10/2012 01:03:26 AM 828 Views
True, but disputing founding articles of faith benefits from tact. Joel - 27/10/2012 02:02:48 AM 792 Views
Come on, Tom. Dannymac - 27/10/2012 03:29:39 AM 833 Views
Are you really defending Calvinism? Be better at metaphysics. Dan - 27/10/2012 03:36:22 AM 904 Views
That's precisely the poor sophistry I'd expect from a Calvinist. Tom - 27/10/2012 06:06:31 AM 833 Views
I believe HE grasps the difference between predestination and determinism well. Joel - 27/10/2012 09:33:14 PM 885 Views
The comment that sparked this was moronic even to the vast majority of religious conservatives. *NM* Narg - 26/10/2012 09:42:51 PM 443 Views
Yet its author remains the only Senate nominee for whom Romney is running ads. Joel - 26/10/2012 10:53:37 PM 804 Views
Is the senator's comment more disgusting to you than the President's vote against the Narg - 26/10/2012 11:54:55 PM 833 Views
how does one vote against a bill which passed by unanimous consent? moondog - 27/10/2012 12:11:37 AM 809 Views
As a state senator in 2001 in illinois he was the sole opponent to the aforementioned bill. *NM* Narg - 27/10/2012 12:14:08 AM 450 Views
[citation needed] moondog - 27/10/2012 12:15:41 AM 784 Views
It was an illinois state bill. *NM* Narg - 27/10/2012 12:23:12 AM 462 Views
yes, i finally found *something* regarding a state bill which he did oppose moondog - 27/10/2012 12:34:40 AM 862 Views
It is not hard to find, really. Joel - 27/10/2012 02:40:06 AM 777 Views
Links: Narg - 27/10/2012 12:51:12 AM 852 Views
Double post. *NM* Narg - 27/10/2012 12:18:42 AM 435 Views
The BAIPA became federal law 2 years before Obamas Senate win; he says he would have voted for it. Joel - 27/10/2012 02:33:26 AM 804 Views
Once he started taking fire for it he said he would have voted for it? Well that clears that up. Narg - 27/10/2012 07:09:21 AM 1011 Views
He "took fire" for a federal law passed before he was in Congress? Joel - 27/10/2012 04:08:25 PM 917 Views
amazing imlad - 28/10/2012 05:04:21 AM 960 Views
Women are certainly encouraged to weigh in, but everyone is entitled to thoughts on the matter Joel - 28/10/2012 02:22:55 PM 832 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes