The Democrats and the Abortion Wars - Are Obama and Pelosi dodging the life-and-death question?

Newsweek ^ | 082508 | George Weigel

[Fred]

A few years ago, Richard Doerflinger, a pro-life Roman Catholic intellectual with decades of experience in the trenches of America's culture wars, was invited to debate the moral and legal status of the human embryo before a large class of Harvard undergraduates. During the course of the discussion, Doerflinger's Harvard faculty interlocutor drew a timeline of human biological development on the blackboard: conception, implantation, brain waves, viability, birth and so forth. His challenge to Doerflinger was to defend, in a nonarbitrary way and without reference to religious principles, the notion that society should recognize moral value and legal rights at any particular point along that line. If here, why here? If there, why there?

After the class, as the conversation continued with a few students and the professor, Doerflinger took a piece of chalk and extended the timeline to the end of the blackboard, where he wrote "Tenure." The students laughed, and got the message. The only point along that continuum that wouldn't be arbitrary was the starting point—conception.

Perhaps Doerflinger should send his extended timeline to the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

Throughout this lengthy campaign, the Democratic Party has worked hard to present itself as the party of intellect, competence and moral seriousness. Yet it's off to a very rocky start in addressing the substance of the abortion issue—which remains, 35 years after Roe v. Wade, one of the most volatile in our public life. Talk this week by Democratic leaders about lowering the incidence of abortion in America will rightly be welcomed by pro-life Democrats, including the large number of pro-life African-American Democrats. But the recent public record has to make committed pro-lifers of both parties wonder just how serious the Democratic leadership is about engaging the abortion debate.

[Juan Medén]

WOW!!! That appeared in NEWSWEEK???

[End Times Sentinel]

How'd you re-direct that link so the URL still says "Newsweek.com"

This is obviously just your blog.

No way would News Weak ever publish a story like this.

Owl_Eagle

If what I just wrote made you sad or angry,
it was probably just a joke.

[Blood of Tyrants]

But the recent public record has to make committed pro-lifers of both parties wonder just how serious the Democratic leadership is about engaging the abortion debate.

Only RECENTLY have they begun to question the 'Rat leadership? What are they, stupid? The 'Rats have opposed EVERY effort to pass even the most non-controversial anti-abortion laws and they are only NOW questioning the 'Rat leadership?

If I could ask Obama ONE question, I would ask him this: What is THE most important right that any human being holds, that can be infringed upon ONLY under the most extreme circumstances.

[pgyanke]

If I could ask Obama ONE question, I would ask him this: What is THE most important right that any human being holds, that can be infringed upon ONLY under the most extreme circumstances.

Obama: Change... or was it hope...?

[SumProVita]

Question: Are Obama and Pelosi dodging the life-and-death question?

Answer: They’ve already chosen death as their answer.

(Excellent article)

[Stosh]

When it comes to anthropogenic global warming, the Lefties are quick to invoke the so-called “Precautionary Principle”: since we can’t be sure IF humans are really causing climate change, it’s best to play it safe, and assume we are.

But when it comes to the question of when human life begins, that “Precautionary Principle” is nowhere to be seen. If they can’t be sure when human life begins, shouldn’t they play it safe and assume it begins at conception?

If someone pulls the “Precautionary Principle” on you in a global warming debate, ask them if they’ll extend that principle to the abortion debate - and if they won’t (and they won’t), recast it for what it is - the “Expediency Principle”.

[HighlyOpinionated]

Pelosi, declaring herself an "ardent, practicing Catholic," told Brokaw that "this is an issue that I have studied for a long time"—and then got herself into a deep muddle, in which she seemed to confuse St. Augustine with St. Thomas Aquinas (neither of whom, in any case, knew anything about modern embryology); misrepresented the settled (and scientifically informed) judgment of the Catholic Church on when life begins by declaring it an open question, and concluded by suggesting that none of this really makes a difference, because what the scientists, theologians, and philosophers say "... shouldn't have an impact on a the woman's right to choose."

Pelosi should definitely refrain from the Eucharist until she figures all this out. How can someone who has such a position of power and authority be so ignorant? I've got twelve year old granddaughters who could give more coherent answers than she did. I hope she loses her next election to the House. Does she drink too much of the fruit of her vineyard or is it the botox and face lifts?

[cpforlife.org]

Click here to watch a 1-minute Ultrasound commercial. Make sure your speakers are on. RealPlayer required, it's Free Pro-Life PING Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.

[Fred]

Washington Times:

EDITORIAL: Planned Parenthood targets blacks