http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2009/04/27/abortion-activist-obama-flu-actions-are-sebelius-cover-up/

Why would the Dems make a law on abortion when the constitutional ruling is already in their favor? Its the GOP who constantly pretends they’re going to do something to get Casey vs Planned Parenthood (This is the controlling ruling, Roe v Wade is no longer relevant) overturned and do nothing about it – because they know they can continue suckering religious single-issue voters into voting for them as long as choice is still legal. The GOP plays religious conservatives for chumps year after year and said chumps never seem to catch on.

Respectfully, the GOP at no time controlled all three branches of government, nor have the Dems controlled all three branches of government. They have had, more or less, control of who sat on empty seats of the Fed Courts, but that is hardly the same thing and has, in some very notable cases, not resulted in the desired outcome.

The “pro-life” movement isn’t strictly Catholic. I have MANY Protestant, Greek Orthodox and even Muslim friends who find the idea of abortion anathema. In fact, there is no one who is truly religious (I mean truly believes in what they claim as their religious faith) who believes that abortion is right, because no religion I can think of supports it.

It has only become a real issue in the U.S. since Roe v. Wade and NEITHER party has made ANY attempt to address the issue, except by rhetoric and political posturing. Many believe that Congress would be 100% within its rights tomorrow (or 100 years ago) to pass a law stating that abortion cannot be restricted in any way or, indeed, the opposite – that it could be restricted at the federal level (Roe was an attack on a state law in TX). It has been discussed many times and I attended a conference while in high school where Chris Matthews himself brought it up in front of his old buddy, that low-life degenerate, Ted Kennedy who did not respond (this was in 1981) – Matthews shut up about it.

Everyone in politics wants it to fall upon the courts to make the decision because they are all – both Dems and Repubs, pro and con – afraid that they will have to answer for it at the polls.

Haven’t you ever asked yourself why the Democratically-controlled Congress (at various times since 1973) has never passed a law regarding abortion and taking right out of the courts’ hands? Why they even let Roe v. Wade get to the courts in the first place? They could have killed it many a time by simply changing the law. I wouldn’t vote based on one’s view on this matter but I can respect that others would, whichever way they lean.

Have a nice night all.

The entire pro-life argument is a trick in that it is a wedge issue that the GOP does nothing about when in office – because if they did they would no longer have that wedge issue to trick people who passionately believe that embryos are people into voting for them.

Here’s a logical problem: The GOP controlled all three branches of the Federal government from 2001 until 2006 and did nothing whatsoever to advance their supposedly “pro-life” agenda. Why is that?

The mistake that I think is being made by many people I know who are angry about this – and I know a lot of them – is in thinking that the university speaks only to Catholics or is, in fact, in the business of proselytizing or standing on Catholic dogma. If it did, that would be one thing but, as noted, the school accepts people of all religious affiliations (one of my best friends is Jewish and a Notre Dame grad) and I don’t believe religious classes are mandatory and I am certain that religious attendance is not mandatory any longer – I believe it was until the 1970s.

Also, Ms. Glendon’s position as Ambassador to the Vatican was a political post and not a religious post in spite of the nature of the Vatican. For her to take issue with someone else receiving an honorary degree from Notre Dame, based on that person’s political or religious views doesn’t make much sense to me. How many people will receive REAL degrees that very day who couldn’t care less what Catholics or the Catholic Church believe? Probably hundreds and it is more than possible that the student speaker(s) won’t be a Catholics either.

Pardon any errors but I am very busy and typed quickly.

What does this even mean? First, one kowtows to people, not to issues. Second, inviting only commencement speakers whose public views don’t go against Catholic dogma isn’t kowtowing to anyone or anything; it’s just being consistent to principles. Third, nobody’s trying to trick anyone into doing anything. The Church is pro-life. It’s very open about this. There’s no “trick” involved in saying Catholics ought to support life.

Dan, you’ve really outdone yourself in incoherent partisan ranting today. Congratulations!

Nor do specific catholic universities have to kowtow to the wedge issues used to try to trick catholics into voting for one particular political party.