Kate Michelman celebrates choice...
Posted on 05/08/2003 8:56:33 AM PDT by DED
Where have all the women gone? There was Kate Michelman, standing behind Sen. Maria Cantwell and the rest of the obstruction Dems on Capitol Hill last week. Together they once again blasted Texas Supreme Court judge Priscilla Owen — a sister! but an ideological heretic — for being the latest bunker-buster headed for the federal bench in order to destroy the penumbras and emanations-of-penumbras of Roe v. Wade. Or so the liberal Democratic interpretation goes.
But why, meanwhile, are the "feminists" nowhere to be seen defending Scott Peterson's right to choose to kill his nearly newborn child? Sure, we all know they're against the murder of Laci Peterson: In fact, NOW has made that clear — as they should. But what about Laci's son, Conner? She had made her choice — can't the sisters respect that?
Maybe they can't-to do so could, after all, be considered a victory for the right-wingers who want to oppress women. When Marva Stark, a NOW chapter head from New Jersey, blurted out, "If this is murder, well, then any time a late-term fetus is aborted, they could call it murder," she was just toeing the party line. This is what they believe. This is what they have long believed. Don't give an inch to protect the most innocent lives.
When asked to defend Stark's statement, however, the women soon fell silent. It seemed as though they'd held a conference call and all agreed simply not to talk about it. Conner Peterson could be really bad for business, gals, they agreed.
They'd like the issue to go away. But it shouldn't. Now that the combat operations in Iraq are over, and the press is focused on the Peterson case, Congress ought to do a little something in Conner's memory. Congress ought to pass the Unborn Victims of Violence Act immediately — before Conner Peterson's memory gives way to another news cycle.
Despite the silence from the "feminists" since Stark's faux pas, some have broken the pact. In USA Today on April 30, former Michael Dukakis campaign manager Susan Estrich wrote, attacking supporters of fetal protection: "Conner Peterson . . . doesn't deserve, however, to be used to score points in a debate that should have nothing to do with this case. The least we can do to honor Laci and Conner Peterson's memories is to not use them as pawns in a politicized debate over abortion." Of course, Estrich is being disingenuous: She "skirts" the "whole abortion debate" by supporting a one-victim pregnant-woman law, that would, as Douglas Johnson from the National Right to Life Committee points out, "would codify the position that Sharon Rocha [Laci Peterson's mother] didn't really lose a grandson," just her daughter.
Though there will be some. On April 28, Democratic congresswoman Zoe Lofgren said, "I think these right-wing groups are despicable for taking this tragic event and trying to use it for their own political ends." Surely it's a lot more "despicable" to ignore the unborn victims of non-abortion violence. But if the self-appointed spokeswomen for women want to argue, they should go ahead. Let them answer to the 84 percent. And let them answer to Laci and Conner's family.
And the idea Estrich promotes that Sharon Rocha didn't lose a grandson is preposterous, as is the feminists position that there is only one death when a pregnant woman is murdered.
The feminists are supprters of heinous crimes against humanity. It is not for lack of reason that they are called "feminazis".
Kate Michelman celebrates choice...
Please show up at your local abortion mill at baby-killing time and show the world that someone DOES care about these most innocent of victims - you're guaranteed to get a warm welcome and some hugs from the faithful prayer warriors on the sidewalk..........
Yes, because it is.
I like Estrich, but she's dead wrong about this. The murdered are frequently used as "pawns" to further larger agendas. One may disagree with the ethics or message of the practice, but advocacy groups have every right to do it. Perfect example of both sides of this coin: Matthew Shepard/Jesse Dirkhising.
No, not the media. On the part of advocacy groups like Traditional Values Coalition, Focus on the Family, etc.
Flipside: Shepard on the part of advocacy groups like Human Rights Campaign, GLAAD, etc.
NARAL, is one sick organization...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.