Shouldn't the Second Coming know things like this?

At CNN's "compassion forum" (whatever that is) the other night, Sen. Obama was asked when life begins, to predictable results:



So basically, "Ugh.....I dunno?". That won't cut it in my estimation. Why? Because if you don't have a clear answer, the only ethical standard is to err on the side of life.

This is a test that Sen. Obama's voting record just doesn't pass, especially when it includes this Illinois State Senate vote:

State senator Obama voted in 2002 against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. The legislation was part of a package that defined a “born alive” infant, including those born after a botched abortion, and required doctors to evaluate and provide medical care to them.

The need for this protection was underscored by a nurse at a Chicago area hospital who had seen a baby born alive and then set aside to die. Infanticide is the accurate word for that, but it might offend an important Democratic special interest group.

Barack Obama didn’t cravenly opt to be merely “present” when it came to infant protection. He went for the Democratic gold and straightforwardly voted no.

So Sen. Obama isn't interested in protected what he concedes might be life or infants that are actually born during botched abortions. You stay classy, Barack.