Obama logic: Child murder is OK, but child abuse and neglect are deplorable

barack obama

According to the US Department of Health and Human Services Children’s Bureau, April is National Child Abuse Prevention Month. The month is dedicated to child abuse prevention in order to acknowledge the reality of child abuse, and to take action to prevent the tragedy from continuing:

National Child Abuse Prevention Month is a time to acknowledge the importance of families and communities working together to prevent child abuse and neglect, and to promote the social and emotional well-being of children and families. During the month of April and throughout the year, communities are encouraged to share child abuse and neglect prevention awareness strategies and activities and promote prevention across the country. In recognition of the 40th anniversary of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, we have designed a historical timeline of significant moments in child abuse prevention in the United States.

The President of the United States made the following proclamation to kick-start National Child Abuse Prevention Month (emphasis added):

In the United States of America, every child should have every chance in life, every chance at happiness, and every chance at success. Yet tragically, hundreds of thousands of young Americans shoulder the burden of abuse or neglect. As a nation, we must do better.

Can Obama honestly promote child abuse prevention when he has taken significant measures — both before and during his presidency — to enshrine and strengthen the greatest child abuse problem in America, which is abortion? Can he simultaneously bless the nation’s most notorious child-killing organization (Planned Parenthood) while simultaneously claiming to desire child welfare? The president’s record on abortion is clear and consistent, and it does not stop at defending a woman’s so-called right to kill her child in utero. On the contrary, Obama voted against measures that would prevent infants born alive after failed abortions from becoming victims of infanticide.

We have seen this irony from the abortion camp in the past. In the complete and utter absence of logic, they are known to avow certain elements of child welfare while simultaneously denouncing a child’s fundamental right to life with gusto. Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America bemoaned violence against children last year. Obama decried the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary in 2012. Wendy Davis insists that every child should have a chance at education, but denies them the right to first be born.

Our question for Obama et al. is this: If not in utero – and not directly after birth – at what point does a child become worthy of protection?

To Top

Send this to friend