Sen.  Barack Obama is pro-choice.  Sen. John McCain is pro-life.  Sen. McCain would abolish Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose.  Sen. Obama would uphold Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose.  This is important because whomever walks into the White House in January 2009 will most likely be responsible for choosing two new Supreme Court Justices who will decide whether to uphold or overturn Roe v. Wade.

The right-wing pundits are going on and on about a vote Sen. Obama made as a state senator.  Lets revisit the Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act shall we.  It is a piece of legislation that was introduced by an Illinois GOP state senator in 2003 when Sen. Obama was a state senator.  The legislation required hospitals to provide a fetus who survived an unsuccessful abortion with medical care.  Sen. Obama voted against the bill.  Sen. Obama, and other democrats and opponents said that they believed the bill to be a thinly veiled attempt by Illinois senate Republicans to undermine Roe v. Wade by interfering with a woman’s right to choose. Legally speaking, if a woman chooses to have an abortion as authorized by Roe v. Wade and a hospital is then required to provide medical care to the non-viable fetus if the abortion is not completely successful, doesn’t that defeat the woman’s choice to have an abortion in the first place.  Illinois abortion opponents tried repeatedly to pass laws that define a fetus (viable or non-viable) surviving an abortion as a person with full rights, requiring a second doctor to be present to provide medical care and creating a right to sue on behalf of the infant.  There are real and complicated legal questions that such a bill would pose to Roe v. Wade.  At the time, there was already an existing Illinois law that insured that life-saving treatment would be given to infants but sponsors of the BAIPA said that the law did not go far enough.  This is a ploy used by Illinois abortion opponents to implement their ultimate agenda of overturning Roe v. Wade.  In 2002, a similar federal Born Alive bill was passed and signed into law by Pres. Bush.  Sen. Obama said that he would have supported the federal bill. Why….because the federal bill did not encroach on the rights granted by Roe v. Wade as there is no federal abortion law. Therefore, the state concerns regarding a woman’s right to choose, do not exist at the federal level.  In 2005, a Born Alive bill was signed into law by the Illinois Senate but the bill specifically provides that it does not affect any existing federal or state laws regarding abortion. That means that it does not encroach upon any of the rights granted under Roe v. Wade. Obama said he would have supported the 2005 version of the Illinois Born Alive bill. This is a nuanced argument that only lawyers have the time to appreciate. But it is a legitimate legal point and the fact that the bill only passed after the Roe v. Wade exclusion was added, lends substantial credibility to Obama’s argument. These are the facts, regardless of how a certain nurse who writes a weekly column for a right wing website describes her experience testifying in front of a state senator Obama.