In Defense of Life: Open Your Mouth For The Mute

2009 May 28
by INC

So the mother of King Lemuel taught him.  Today Robert George is continuing to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves.

Jill Stanek is live blogging and twittering a debate today between Robert George and Doug Kmiec from 5:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.  EST at the National Press Club:

“The Obama Administration and the Sanctity of Human Life: Is There a Common Ground on Life Issues? What is the Right Response by ‘Pro-Life” Citizens?”

…The debate will be moderated by Professor Mary Ann Glendon, of Harvard Law School.

You’ll recall Glendon declined Notre Dame’s Laetare Medal upon ND’s decision to honor Obama as well.

Doug Kmiec is a law professor at Pepperdine University and voted for Obama.  Robert P. George is a constitutional law and moral philosophy professor at Princeton.

George is an absolutely brilliant man.  If you are not familiar with him, this article combines biographical information with insight into his personality:

Conservative Heavyweight: The Remarkable Mind of Robert P. George

I highly recommend this article by George:

Our Struggle for the Soul of our Nation

UPDATE: Jill is live blogging at the moment.  This is an update from her regarding the format:

Rules being read. Professor Glendon will give an introduction. Then Profs. George and Kmiec will have 20 minutes to speak, then Q&A, then closing comments. We’ve been informed twice now this is a discussion, not a debate.

UPDATE  II: Thomas Peters of American Papist provides links to George’s text:  Obama and His Pro-Life Apologists and to C-Span video of the debate.


H/T:  Jill Stanek

27 Responses leave one →
  1. 2009 May 28 2:52 pm
    INC permalink

    I had not planned on any blogging today, but I just learned of this debate late this afternoon. I first read about Robert George a few weeks ago. I was quite impressed and when I saw his name today I wanted to bring this to your attention.

    Jill reports that the Washington Times, USA Today, World magazine and US News & World Report are there.

  2. 2009 May 28 3:14 pm
    INC permalink

    Jill notes that Robert George has mentioned the White House meeting with Melody Barnes. In case you missed it, this is from last week. Wendy Wright wrote of a revealing slip by Barnes:

    Obama Aide: Not Our Goal to Reduce Abortions

    Ask nearly anyone, “What is Obama’s goal on abortion?” They’ll answer, “Reduce the number of abortions.” A Notre Dame professor and priest insisted this in a television debate after Obama’s speech…

    But that’s not what his top official in charge of finding “common ground” says.

    Melody Barnes, the Director of Domestic Policy Council and a former board member of Emily’s List, led the meeting. As the dialogue wound down, she asked for my input.

    I noted that there are three main ways the administration can reach its goals: by what it funds, its messages from the bully pulpit, and by what it restricts…

    Melody testily interrupted to state that she had to correct me. “It is not our goal to reduce the number of abortions.”

    The room was silent.

    The goal, she insisted, is to “reduce the need for abortions.”

    Well, this raises a lot of questions.

    If you reduce the need, doesn’t it follow that the number would be reduced? How do you quantify if you’ve reduced the “need”? Does Obama want to reduce the “need” but not the number of abortions? In that case, is he okay with “unneeded” abortions?

    Note what Obama said in his speech at Notre Dame:

    “So let us work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions. …”

    Abortion advocates object to the phrase “reducing abortions.” It connotes that there is something bad or immoral about abortion…

    The Los Angeles Times reported in 2004 that Democrats, after losing the presidential election, began rethinking their harsh, no compromise stance on abortion. Their solution?

    Change their language but not their position.

    Read the whole thing.

  3. 2009 May 28 3:28 pm
    JustMary permalink

    0’s speech reminds me of the tired mantra “no one is for abortion”.

  4. 2009 May 28 3:31 pm
    INC permalink

    You’re right.

  5. 2009 May 28 3:42 pm
    INC permalink

    Both the blogging and the twitters were interesting. It’ll be fascinating to see the content of the articles written on this.

    Jill linked to some other twitters. A couple of quotes:

    kmiec is shifting the conversation from abortion to embryonic stem cell research, depending on what hard question he wants to avoide.


    Debate over. Still amazed by Kmiec’s ability to ignore/obfuscate the reality of human life.

  6. 2009 May 28 6:09 pm
    justrand permalink

    The abortion-on-demand crowd is losing the argument these days.

    Advances in medical science make life viable outside the womb earlier and earlier. So where’s the rationale for killing the baby, if the baby can survive without the “host” that doesn’t want him or her?

    Of course, MEN are still ignoring the FACT that the life inside the “host” is 1/2 THEM!! So why do they have ZERO say in whether the baby should be killed?

    p.s. I use the term “host” since they’re only “mother” if they allow the child to live.

  7. 2009 May 28 6:09 pm
    RepublicanPundit permalink

    Debating a liberal is like trying to teach a monkey how to fly a plane.

  8. 2009 May 28 6:14 pm

    RepublicanPundit permalink
    Debating a liberal is like trying to teach a monkey how to fly a plane.

    With enough banana pellet, it can be done.

  9. 2009 May 28 6:22 pm

    I don’t believe I would ever GO IN HARMS WAY for this country.

  10. 2009 May 28 6:45 pm
    justrand permalink

    good God, IP, that is a horrible and heart-wrenching story. I pray that the right thing gets done…but have ZERO faith that it will.

    Why we still feel we must villify OUR people, and elevate the enemy is beyond me. But these particular chickens are coming home to roost…very soon now I think.

  11. 2009 May 28 7:00 pm
    sindalin44 permalink

    The premise of a piece I saw the other day is that it’s gotten harder to have civil disagreement with libs now because the rational part of their minds closes down the second you voice any criticism of Zero.

    This has been my experience with some friends on the other side. They continue to bash Bush and expect you to take it, but they get bent out of shape when you mildly criticize Obama’s policies–his policies, mind you. Mocking him or attacking him the way they do Bush, well, the rifts would be irreparable. Typical double standard.

    That’s the scary thing about what’s going on: so many people are so invested in this guy, they refuse to see what’s happening to the country.

  12. 2009 May 28 7:10 pm
    justrand permalink

    sindalin44, as I’ve posted before…people’s opinions on whether an avalanche will occur or not, has no value when it is careening down the mountain at them.

    I heard one of Obama’s spokesweasels today re-spout the claim that “Obama has saved or created 150,000 jobs!”. They “base” this on their contention that it would have been that much worse without Obama. This analogy immediately came to mind (and if I was a cartoonist I would draw it!)

    Imagine that you offer to drive a group of your friends somewhere. You then proceed to drive recklessly, and wind up in a ditch with the car destroyed and your friends badly injured. As they scream at you in pain, can you imagine shouting back at them:
    If one of YOU had driven it would have been even worse!!

    as we lay bleeding in the ditch that was America, Obama continues to claim that without HIM, it would have been worse.

  13. 2009 May 28 7:16 pm
    mulletover permalink

    Obama ~~ 150,000 jobs created or saved since the stimulus was signed.

    Reality ~~ 500,000+ jobs lost each month since the stimulus was signed.

  14. 2009 May 28 7:25 pm
    RepublicanPundit permalink

    IP, You and I both put our lives on the line for this country.

    But, we knew that the government was on our side. These kids today have to be feeling that the government is as big as ememy as the terrorist are.

    It is truly a sad state of affairs.

  15. 2009 May 28 7:32 pm

    These kids today have to be feeling that the government is as big as ememy as the terrorist are.~~~repub

    “We have seen the enemy, and it is us”.~~~pogo

  16. 2009 May 28 7:41 pm
    sindalin44 permalink

    From Hugh Hewitt’s blog, bearinthe woods84 offers these observations, which I think are on the mark:

    “Just look at the issues and happenings of the last few weeks: Torture vs. enhanced interrogation, did it work?, do they care?, what did Pelosi know?, what did Pelosi say this time?, the unleashing of Cheney, Gitmo vs. Supermax, cap and trade, Obamacare, single payer, the budget, the performance tax, the California tax revolt, the California bailout . . . .there’s so much going on, you simply can’t keep up with it all.

    Which is exactly what the Administration is hoping. Remember HOPE? Their greatest hope seems to be to divide, confuse, diffuse, and ultimately, conquer. And recent success stories notwithstanding, if we on the right don’t recognize the strategy, and address it for what it is and how it’s designed, we play directly into it . . . .

    Now, all of this may seem obvious to a well-versed political observer — even an amateur one like me. But the other obvious thing that most well-versed political observers, professional and amateur alike, almost always miss — is the fact that most people aren’t well-versed political observers. They just don’t pay close enough attention. Not because they’re stupid. They’re not. But because they’re people, and they simply have other stuff to do.”

  17. 2009 May 28 8:43 pm
    rightwingyahoo permalink

    And Poli comes out for Sotomayor. I think I’m done with ol’ Poli.

  18. 2009 May 28 8:49 pm

    He done jumped the shark,
    he is nothing but a snark,
    as a pundit he is failing,,
    the dead horse he is flailing,
    he is wandering in the dark.

  19. 2009 May 28 8:52 pm
    rightwingyahoo permalink

    He did the same for Obama. Came out after 3 days of his administration and said Obama was moderate.

    I know what it is, but of course I can’t say it. Let’s just say he’s easily fooled and wants badly to worship at the feet of the Communist like everyone else.

    Well, it was fun while it lasted.

  20. 2009 May 28 8:57 pm
    janzam permalink


    Good post above. These are definintely confusing and frustrating times for many of us.

    For the rest, well they are still under the “spell,” it seems, of electing a man who will change the world for the better. When it finally hits them, what he has really done to the world, I only hopr there will be time to change what he has done.

    Today we went on a short day trip to a town 50 miles north of us, Ft Bragg, CA. Main street now has at least a 25% vacancy factor. Stores that had been in business for decades —> gone! One sign on a window said it all: “Depression rates, 60 cents a sq. ft.”

  21. 2009 May 28 8:58 pm
    rightwingyahoo permalink

    And no takers at that price.

  22. 2009 May 28 9:05 pm
    janzam permalink

    I saw Polipundits post and didn’t see it as an endorsement of Sotomayor. It merely said that the research he had done, it seemed her decisions were ones of either a principled liberal or a libertarian. He cited various cases which supported his claim.

    I hope he is right, as we are going to be stuck with her for a long time, being she is 54ish in age.

    In the meantime, may the republicans have the courage to oppose her if they feel she is unfit for office.

    The main thing to consider,though, is if she doesn’t get in will Obama propose someone even worse? We all know that his choices will be no where near what Conservatives want. So, is this the worst one he can make?

  23. 2009 May 29 7:16 am
    conservativetony permalink

    The point here, Jan, is to make Obama fight and earn everything he wants. This goes beyond SC nominations. He’s had it easy so far.

    Remember, Bush’s nominees were initially rejected simply because a Republican nominated them.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. American Principles Project: Winning on Principle | Be John Galt
  2. J’s Cafe Nette » American Principles Project: Winning on Principle
  3. American Principles Project: Winning on Principle - INC’s blog - RedState
  4. In Defense of Life:Abortion and the State of a Nation | Be John Galt

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.