I am disgusted by the latest attacks on Obama via robocalls (which McCain in the past condemned) and via mailers which claim Obama opposed legislation that would require medical treatment for fetuses born alive during an abortion. This is a gross distortion of his position, a position which he made clear during the debate. (see CNN's analysis below.)

It is true that Obama believes that Roe v. Wade was correctly decided. He also believes that we should do all we can to avoid unwanted pregnancies and to keep women from being in a position of having an unwanted pregnancy. Most Americans believe that abortions should be legal, though there is much difference of opinion as to what the proper limits should be.

What many in the anti-choice camp ignore is that one can be pro choice and pro life. Pro choice simply means women, like Bristol Palin, can decide for themselves whether they believe an abortion is the correct choice in their own circumstances. Remember Gov. Palin praising her daughter for making the "correct choice?" Roe v. Wade is what gives Bristol Palin and other women the right to make these tough choices, hopefully with the input of their family, religious community, friends and medical professionals. Of course, if it is so clear that abortion is wrong, there was no "choice" for Bristol to make?

What Roe v. Wade says is that there is a right to privacy in the Constitution, which Governor Palin agrees is true. If there is a right to privacy, then Constitutionally the government has to justify why it should intrude into that privacy. The Supreme Court concluded that in the first tri-mester, the government has limited authority to intrude and limit a woman's right to control her own body. It further ruled that in the second trimester the government may have more control, and even more control in the third trimester.

Obama opposes third trimester abortions IF there is an exception for the health and life of the mother. McCain/Palin believe that even if the mother will die, that an unborn fetus has a greater right to live and the government gets to tell the pregnant woman, "sorry, your life just isn't as important as your fetus, and you get to die." I can't accept that.

Preserving a woman's right to choice is among the many reasons I am voting for Obama and hope others will too. The next President will likely appoint several Supreme Court justices. Our right to privacy hangs in the balance.

Now to Obama's opposition to the bill regarding children born alive during an abortion. Such a law was on the books as of 1975. The 2003 bill would have gone far beyond simply requiring medical treatment of a fetus born alive during an abortion, and would have jeopardized existing abortion laws, and interfere with the physycian patient relationship. This legislation was opposed by the Illinoise Medical Association primarily because of the conflict created by and intrusion into the physician-patient relationship.

The decision to have an abortion is not an easy one, and those I have known who made that decision did not do so lightly. I, for one, do not want to return to the days of abortions being illegal, where only the rich and privileged were able to secretly get an abortion, and where a rape victim would be forced to bear a child resulting from that rape.

From CNN Factcheck:

Did Obama vote against care for children born during abortions?

A law passed in Illinois in 1975 does require life-saving treatment if a child is born alive during an abortion. Under the law, if a child is delivered alive during an abortion, a doctor "shall exercise the same degree of professional skill, care and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as would be required of a physician" for any other newborn.

The 2003 bill did not make it out of the Judiciary committee.

Verdict: Misleading. Obama voted against the legislation, but said doing so was not a vote against caring for the children, because there was already an Illinois law that required treating babies born alive during abortions.