http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080331/ap_on_sc/choosing_sons_2

Some Asian families in US choosing sons

Edlund and Almond said they do not know what method is being used for sex selection, but they speculated that the most common is fetal ultrasound to determine the sex of the baby followed by disproportionate abortion of females. Ultrasound has improved in recent years and is being given earlier, they noted.

“Between 1989 and 1999, prenatal ultrasound use among non-Japanese Asian mothers rose from around 38 percent to 64 percent of pregnancies,” they said, citing data from the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics.

The normal sex ratio at birth is 1.05 boys to 1 girl and that holds for first children of these families, the researchers found.

But ifthe first baby is a girl, the odds of a boy coming next rise to 1.17-to-1, and after two sisters the likelihood of having a son jumps to 1.51-to-1.

I know we’re not supposed to say that some cultures are better than others, but…

Obama:

“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. I don’t want them punished with an STD at age 16, so it doesn’t make sense to not give them information.”

Punishment?  Getting pregnant is like getting and STD?

“I think that the bottom line is that in the end, I think women, in consultation with their pastors, and their doctors, and their family, are in a better position to make these decisions than some bureaucrat in Washington. That’s my view,” Obama said about abortion.
http://www.crosswalk.com/news/religiontoday/11569732/

When it comes to making abortion decisions, no “bureaucrat in Washington” should have any input. However, a huge government bureaucracy needs to be created/expanded to deal with every other medical decision that we deal with in our lives. Why does abortion get a pass?

Because abortion is sacred.

In a 2001 Illinois Senate floor speech about that bill, [Obama] argued that to call a baby who survived an abortion a “person” would give it equal protection rights under the 14th Amendment and would give credibility to the argument that the same child inside its mother’s womb was also a “person” and thus could not be aborted.

When the Illinois Senate bill was amended to make it identical to a federal law that included language to protect Roe v. Wade–and that the U.S. Senate voted unanimously to pass–Obama still opposed the bill, voting it down in the Illinois Senate committee he chaired.
http://www.crosswalk.com/news/religiontoday/11569732/

God forbid that a living baby would be defined as a person. This places him at the extreme left, squarely out of the mainstream morally, ethically, and popularly.

During a debate against Keyes in March 2004, Obama rationalized: “Now, the bill that was put forward was essentially a way of getting around Roe vs. Wade, which is why 21 other senators, Democrat and Republican, why the Illinois Medical Society objected to the bill. At the federal level, there was a similar bill that passed because it had an amendment saying this does not encroach on Roe vs. Wade. I would have voted for that bill.”
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53617

Except he DIDN’T vote for that bill.

On the topic of abortion, Obama said his support for keeping it legal does not trespass on his Christian faith.

“I think that the bottom line is that in the end, I think women, in consultation with their pastors, and their doctors, and their family, are in a better position to make these decisions than some bureaucrat in Washington. That’s my view,” Obama said about abortion. “Again, I respect people who may disagree, but I certainly don’t think it makes me less Christian. Okay.”
http://www.crosswalk.com/news/religiontoday/11569732/

Okay. Without questioning his Christian faith, we can at least classify him as a Christian who opposed a law that would classify a living baby as a person.

An Obama spokesman told the Chicago Tribune in August 2004 that Obama voted against Born Alive because it included provisions that “would have taken away from doctors their professional judgment when a fetus is viable.”

Obama told the Chicago Sun-Times in October 2004 he opposed BAIPA because “physicians are already required to use life-saving measures when fetuses are born alive during abortions.”

So he voted against it because he didn’t want to interfere with a doctor’s professional judgment, but also defended his vote three months later by claiming doctors were already required to save a live-born baby’s life regardless of their professional judgment. HUH?