New Yorker blogger Hendrik Hertzberg seems to be unable to tell the difference between being descriptive and proscriptive.
What this (ed. - calling Sarah Palin’s decision to give birth to Trig a “choice”) demonstrates is that even in the minds of anti-abortion zealots, abortion is now implicitly viewed in the same light as divorce: an unfortunate choice, a reprehensible choice, a choice that may even contravene the will of God, but still a choice. And, again implicitly, the choice that Sarah Palin had every right to make. In both directions.Uhh... what? How does the fact that prolifers recognize the reality women that can currently legally choose to have an abortionist end the lives of their unborn children mean we think that women should have the right to make that choice? I guess, according to Hertzberg attempt at reasoning, because I have a “Choose Life” sticker on my car that means I think women should be allowed to choose death.
I’m way late on this (I just got a chance to finish listening to it) but here’s a conversation/debate between Scott Klusendorf and Tony Jones regarding the election and whether it makes sense for prolifers to vote for Obama. While Tony Jones certainly seems like a nice person he really can’t square his prolife beliefs with Obama’s positions on abortion. His whole position (which is similar to Doug Kmiec’s) seems to based on some weird, incoherent faith in Obama’s ability to reduce abortions while completely ignoring Obama’s pro-abortion promises which if implemented would greatly increase the number of abortions performed in the United States.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment