Kmiec pro-life strategy criticized as ‘implausible’
Imprimir Incrementar tamaño de fuente Disminuir tamaño de fuente

CNA STAFF, Nov 8, 2008 / 06:56 pm (CNA).- Discussion continues over Pepperdine University law professor and pro-life Catholic Doug Kmiec’s arguments on behalf of the pro-abortion rights President-elect Barack Obama. Ross Douthat, a political commentator writing on Slate.com, critiqued Kmiec while defending the pro-life political strategy focused upon appointing Supreme Court nominees to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Douthat expressed his astonishment at Kmiec’s position, which he said seems to be “that the contemporary Democratic Party, and particularly the candidacy of Barack Obama, offered nearly as much to pro-lifers as the Republican Party does.”

Critiques of Obama’s abortion stand, which Kmiec labeled as “outright lies and falsehoods,” were, according to Douthat, “more or less the truth.” Obama’s record can only be described as “very, very pro-choice,” his positions involving a rollback of “nearly all the modest—but also modestly effective—restrictions that pro-lifers have placed upon the practice and/or appointing judges who would do the same,” Douthat wrote.

While granting that anti-abortion voters might have reasons for voting for Obama despite his abortion position, Douthat argued “Kmiec's suggestion that Obama took the Democrats in anything like a pro-life direction on the issue doesn't pass the laugh test.”

 Douthat added that he believes Kmiec’s suggestion that pro-lifers pursue a Human Life Amendment is “far more implausible” than working towards securing favorable Supreme Court justice nominees.

“The trouble with seeking common ground on abortion is that the legal regime enacted by Roe and reaffirmed in Casey permits only the most minimal regulation of the practice, which means that any plausible ‘compromise’ that leaves Roe in place will offer almost nothing to pro-lifers,” Douthat continued on Slate.com.

Even “modest restrictions” that prevail in Europe, which Douthat claimed coincide with lower abortion rates, are “out of the question under the current legal dispensation.”

“This, in turn, explains why the national debate inevitably revolves around the composition of the Supreme Court and the either/or question of whether a president will appoint justices likely to chip away the Roe-Casey regime or justices likely to uphold it.”

Imprimir Incrementar tamaño de fuente Disminuir tamaño de fuente
Subscriber comments:
Published by: Rev. Deacon Avaletalia M Hunkin
Diocese of Samoa-Pago Pago, American Samoa 11/10/2008 03:15 PM EST
The US Suprement Court does not have power over human life and neither the mothers of the unborn spiritual beings. Only God the Creator who gives life has power over His creations.
True and faithful followers/disciples of Jesus Christ must stand up and proclaim the "will of God" in our daily lives, but not what the supreme court (human nation) tells us to do.
Let us continue praying so Christ's church shall continue to prevail over our daily lives.
Rate this comment:
Published by: Ken Ryan
San Diego/CA/USA 11/10/2008 02:01 PM EST
Kmiec is NOT pro-LIFE. Quite referring to him as such. He has defied Our Lord and the Holy Father in his preverted logic in support of Abortion.
Rate this comment:
Published by: frjimt
pocono pines, pa, usa 11/09/2008 10:43 PM EST
Discussion?
what discussion?
I listened to his indefensible defense on heart of the matter podcast.
He is incredible. Now he's going to do everything he can to convince our emperor to be more pro-life.

Maybe he should take Casey, Pelosi & Biden with him. I'm sure they'll back him up & speak out for the defenseless unborn.
Rate this comment:
Published by: Ron Pichlik
Battle Creek, MI USA 11/09/2008 11:17 AM EST
The good professor is either incredible naive, or sincerly disingenuous. Of course we would all like to see a Human Life Amendment. However, the first step in accomplishing that ultimate goal is to overturn Roe v Wade; until you establish that there is no "right" to abortion it is truly ridiculous for the pro-life movement to spin their wheels in trying to get a Human Life Amendment passed. A cynical person would think that Professor Kmiec wants to sound pro-life when in reality he simply doesn't care and wants to encourage the pro-lifers to basically waste their time trying to get an amendment passed that has no chance of being passed as long as Roe v Wade stands as the law of the land. I suspect that the professor is simply trying to reconcile what he knows was his cooperation with evil, (in supporting a pro-abortion), candidate while trying to sound like he is really pro-life; a trick by the way played very deftly by many nominally "Catholic" politicians. It's long past time that Catholics understand that their "conscience" if properly formed CANNOT be in opposition to Church teachings on faith and morals; Catholics need to familiarize themselves with Lumen Gentia and Vatican II.
Rate this comment:
Published by: Kerry
Austin/Texas 11/09/2008 10:21 AM EST
Kmiec gets his wish, he helped to cofuse some and now we are all to suffer. I hope he comes to realize his mistake in time, but as Mr. Douthat points out-- an argument that doesn't pass the 'laugh test' from a so called Catholic, Pro-Life and law professor to boot? I'm not a shrink, but clearly this suggests there is a deeper problem here with Kmiec than just error in reasoning. I pray he is not hardened to the overwhelming criticisms.
Rate this comment:
ADD A COMMENT (Your e-mail will NOT be published):
NAME:
CITY/STATE/COUNTRY:
EMAIL:
COMMENT:
 
PLEASE ENTER THE SECURITY CODE DISPLAYED ABOVE:
Chars:
* Thanks for your comments. The number of messages that can be online is limited. Length should not exceed 1500 characters. CNA reserves the right to edit messages for content and tone. Comments and opinions expressed by users do not necessarily reflect the opinions or beliefs of CNA. CNA will not publish comments with abusive language, insults or links to other pages.
ADVERTISING
Place your ad here
Resources:
Columns:
News:
Documents:
Tools:
ACI Group:
ACI Prensa