Boxer, Durbin, Kirk – Lack Both Knowledge and Wisdom

Written by Laurie Higgins

Anyone who believes women have a Constitutional right to have their partially delivered live babies’ heads punctured with scissors, brains suctioned out, and skull collapsed does not deserve to serve in any elected office or the Judiciary.

Not only do such people lack an understanding of the Constitution, but they lack even a primitive moral compass.

U.S. Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), and U.S. Representative Mark Kirk (R-IL) are three such people.

Here’s an excerpt from George Will’s latest column on Boxer’s cowardly attempt to evade some simple questions posed by Rick Santorum on the Senate floor:

In a letter in last week’s NEWSWEEK, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said that, in the previous issue, this columnist [Will] got her position on late-term abortion “wrong” by “taking my words out of context.” Well.

C-Span recorded her words in the Oct. 20, 1999, Senate colloquy that can be seen today on YouTube….[in]the procedure commonly called “partial-birth” abortion…The baby is about 80 percent delivered, feet first, until a portion of the skull is exposed. Then the skull is punctured and collapsed as its contents are sucked out.

In the 1999 colloquy, Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) said: Suppose during this procedure the baby slips entirely from the mother’s birth canal. “You agree, once a child is born, is separated from the mother, that that child is protected by the Constitution and cannot be killed? Do you agree with that?” Boxer: “I think when you bring your baby home, when your baby is born … the baby belongs to your family and has all the rights.” Santorum persisted: “Obviously, you don’t mean they have to take the baby out of the hospital for it to be protected by the Constitution. Once the baby is separated from the mother, you would agree-completely separated from the mother-you would agree that the baby is entitled to constitutional protection?” She would not say “yes.” Instead, she said, understandably: “I don’t want to engage in this.”

(Watch the exchange on C-Span.)

Is there no moral offense capable of getting Illinoisans angry enough to reject a candidate? Do Illinoisans really believe that financial hanky-panky is a graver moral offense than partial birth abortion?

Have our consciences become so seared that we would vote for men and women who believe that the Constitution permits infanticide?

And I’m the extremist.

Click here to learn more about the partial birth abortion procedure.