-
Not Just the Media: First Amendment Under Attack
May 22, 2013 | 1 comment
-
Curl is Right: Don’t Dismiss Benghazi
May 22, 2013 | 2 comments
-
Artur Davis Says Scandals Are Real
May 19, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Good New Book: ‘Precipice’
May 19, 2013 | 1 comment
-
A Long Record of Obamite Thuggery
May 16, 2013 | 4 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Phil Klein is probably right that Rick Santorum’s recent mention of Obama’s race while discussing abortion was, shall we say, inartful. Yet there is a serious issue here, in that there really is a horrendous link between abortion and race. When three-fifths (there is that number again) of black babies in New York City are aborted, it is a tragedy of epic proportions. It also is worth noting that Planned Parenthood’s patron saint, Margaret Sanger, was by a number of accounts (this may still be disputed, but probably not strongly disputed) motivated in part by racist objectives. Finally, it is worth noting that because so many black politicians so often cite the Three-Fifths Compromise as reason enough to avoid [their version of] originalist interpretations of the Constitution, including just two weeks ago when they objected to Congress’ reading thereof, it is understandable and certainly not racist in itself for Santorum, or anybody, to make the rather common point that the 14th Amendment protections for “persons,” which helped correct the Three Firths Compromise, do mean ALL persons, and that if a human life isn’t a person, it is rather unclear what the heck it is.
In short, it might not have been politically wise for Santorum to say what he said. But his point was valid, and in no way mean-spirited. The left gets away all the time with playing the race card in defending Obama from criticism. Santorum’s comparison of black personhood to unborn baby personhood was, unlike most of those irrelevant lefty citations of race, a largely reasonable use of a logical analogy.
View all comments (12) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/01/20/re-santorum-on-abortion
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Too Many Tims| 1.20.11 @ 2:22PM
Maybe you're right, hell nobody pays me for my opinions - but as I see it the only criticism Santorum has unleashed so far has been from AmSpec essayists.
And since when has been avoiding criticism been a laudable goal?
Neo-libertarian| 1.20.11 @ 3:32PM
Rick Santorum has, and does, have the exact same chance of political revival as the pro-life faction had, and will, be able to reverse abortion law. May I remind you he is the clown that endorsed Specter. (The only thing worse, by the way, is being governor of Massachusetts and laying the groundwork for Obamacare). I humbly suggest that we all go back and read the Tea Party contract and get moving on the things that will actually save America. After all there are only two things anyone can do about abortion, if you are pregnant, don’t have one (women) and elect people that will not force you to pay for them (men and women). Millions, and millions, and millions of women have actually made this decision which certainly is more telling than reading what is said here. The tipping point has been passed legislatively, the barbarity of the procedure is leaving the surgical theater and the monsters with scissors will become nothing more sinister than a faceless pharmacist and a three by five paper bearing a scribbled prescription.
You have a choice (hate that word I will bet), you can focus on the contemporary and concentrate on saving a system that GIVES a woman the freedom to decide what they do with their lives or you can uselessly pander your resources and lose that system to a government, like the one Obama is now toasting, that will TELL you what reproductive choices you have. I will not support the pro-life faction taking away a woman’s ability to make reproductive decisions, such choices are not for they (or the Chinese government) to make. One final point, the only thing more futile than arguing about the reproductive rights of women is rehashing statements from obscure political losers the magnitude of Santorum, the only reason I enter this discussion is to try to get a few back on the things we can actually accomplish in preserving our democracy, and that certainly does not include abortion debate or buffoons.
tonypal| 1.20.11 @ 6:05PM
It is not a reproductive choice to murder an unborn child. It's murder. The true choice comes when the woman must decide whether or not to get pregnant in the first place. That's a reproductive choice. Unfortunately, too many women make the wrong choice.
Roe v. Wade is bad law, whether or not you agree with the ultimate outcome. We studied the line of cases leading up to Roe in my Con. Law class in law school. It started out with a condom case, part of a long strategy which was well thought out by the left. Roe is such a muddled mess and the line of cases affirming Roe to one degree or another are just as convoluted. Former justice O'Connor was unsurprisingly the author of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which was just another of her convoluted decisions. If you need an non-abortion example, try working your way through Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, which was a school voucher case and see if you can make sense of her application of the Lemon Test.
Anyway, abortion law should be subject to the 10th amendment. Roe ought to be overturned and the matter sent back to the states. Once the issue is dealt with properly, through the legislative process, we will be able to dispense with the political hostility that has accompanied this issue since the day Roe was decided.
David Calvani| 1.20.11 @ 8:57PM
"Millions, and millions, and millions of women have actually made this decision which certainly is more telling than reading what is said here."
And many more millions and millions and millions of women haven't made said decision. Which I suppose is even more telling than what you wrote. So what's your point. Oh, wait -- you don't have one.
"the barbarity of the procedure is leaving the surgical theater and the monsters with scissors will become nothing more sinister than a faceless pharmacist and a three by five paper bearing a scribbled prescription."
Yes. Because pharmacists are well-known for having no faces, prescriptions can never be used for sinister purposes, and second- and third-trimester abortions have suddenly dissapeared.
"I will not support the pro-life faction taking away a woman’s ability to make reproductive decisions..."
But you implied the pro-life movement had no chance of doing so. Do you not believe what you began your comment by saying?
In any event, I (and my will is as strong as yours I'm sure) will not support the pro-abortion faction taking away the natural rights of unborn children. So there.
"the only thing more futile than arguing about the reproductive rights of women is rehashing statements from obscure political losers the magnitude of Santorum..."
CORRECTION: The only thing more futile than rehashing statements from obscure poltical losers is arguing the point that the right to life exists throughtout the life cycle or it doesn't exist at all with a moron. (Yes, Neo-libertarian, that means you.)
"I enter this discussion is to try to get a few back on the things we can actually accomplish in preserving our democracy, and that certainly does not include abortion debate or buffoons."
You need to be careful about throwing the word "buffoon" around as it clearly applies very well to you. As such your opinions on what can and cannot be accomplished in preserving our democracy aren't worth much.
9th ID| 1.20.11 @ 4:06PM
The genocide of millions of defenseless unborn children does not fall under what you so callously call "reproductive choices". I have little doubt that you have no problem with the serial killer Doc in Philly that exercised his "practice" in which 7 of your "reproductive choices" were snuffed out of existence.
For the so called Christians on this thread, at what point did Jesus Christ become more than a "reproductive choice"? Sick world we live in... - Social Justice Begins In The Womb -
I Survived Arlen Specter| 1.20.11 @ 5:16PM
You're absolutely right 9th ID. As for your question, "at what point did Jesus Christ become more than a reproductive choice?", that is easy to answer. A child is a gift from GOD, not a reproductive choice as Neo-Libertarian tried to convince in his drooling rant. Also, Jesus Christ, being fully GOD as well as fully man could not have been disposed of as the 50 million children & counting in this country have been since Roe vs. Wade legalized infanticide in 1973. GOD cannot be killed. Also the type of fiscal-only conservatism Neo-Libertarian wants The Tea Party to follow will not defeat Barack Obama in 2012. If amoral yahoos like Neo-Libertarian with their "Kill 'em all & let GOD sort "em out, as long as it doesn't affect me or my wallet!" mentality are what represent The Tea Party (I hope they don't) they've got big problems. Neo-Libertarian's views on GOD's gift of life are no different than those of President Obama & the left.
Tina B| 1.20.11 @ 5:27PM
Amen, 9th ID.
My skin crawled as I read those words as well. "reproductive choices," " reproductive decisions," reproductive rights": all jargon for legalized murder of the preborn child.
" tell women what to do with THEIR lives," Who's talking about the women's lives. . . . we're concerned with the pre-born baby's life, every last one of them!
And just as you, Neo, would be greatly concerned if someone used saline solution, forcepts and scissors, vacuum, or even a pathetic deadly perscription (easy to get but just as lethal to the child) to kill your children, wife, sister, mother, lover, or whoever is important to and loved by you.
I, and the collective we, feel just as strongly for the pre-born child of any poor, emotionally wrought young (or older, experienced) mother in an unwanted pregnancy. Every baby counts.
I just don't believe in murder, be it abortion or euthanasia. Every soul is important to God, and Christ died for each and every one of us. Unwanted or wanted. No difference to Him.
I've put my money where my mouth is and given a baby up for adoption, in 1976, after laying eyes on him once. And the wonderful Lord enabled me to find him and meet his family after a flight from FL to MN. We loved, bonded, worshipped and partied. I was thanked, respected and appreciated by all those whose lives Wally was able to touch in his 35 years of wonderful existence.
Ah, God. Ah, adoption with a mighty God. Adoption, not abortion. Just two little letters but what different results.
Steve in Pittsburgh| 1.20.11 @ 6:14PM
Black America, as a group, are choosing to kill themselves; there is nothing(short of outlawing abortion) that whitey can do about it.
Perhaps, if we (conservatives) win control of the White House and both houses we can oulaw it; until then, we best focus on winning elections and the economy. And selected "freedom" issues, like stopping net neutrality, the Fairness Doctrine, etc.
tonpal| 1.20.11 @ 6:17PM
The whole issue surrounding the rate of abortion among blacks just points to the inherent racism of liberalism and liberals in general. Liberals are by their very nature a condescending bunch; they see nothing but victims and set themselves up as saviors. They have one set of expectations for themselves and another for their annointed victims. When liberals see a black person, they don't see the humanity of the man or woman. They see a victim incapable of succeeding without the assistance of a liberal white benefactor.
On the other hand, liberals apparently have no problem with high abortion rates among black people. That's just fine because it's hard and inconvenient to raise a child and white liberals know how hard it is to be black in America. So just kill the damn baby and get it over with because you as a black woman just aren't up to the task. Hell, we'll even get you federal funding to commit the grisly act. This is the true racism in this country and it comes from your friendly neighborhood liberal.
As an aside to all of this, there may come a day when we find that homosexuality is indeed genetic. When we discover the gene responsible for sexual orientation, what in the world are liberals going to do when people start aborting unborn children because a test showed they carry the "gay" gene? Sometimes you get what you hope for - in this case, proof of a genetic sexual predisposition - and it doesn't work out quite the way you expected. Should be interesting.
Oldefarte| 1.21.11 @ 2:15PM
The elements of 3/5ths and the 14th aside, IMO the connection of race to abortion should result in rational individuals of all races being in favor of abortion [though only as a birth control measure of last resort]. Indigent births results in all such children to a lifetime of misery, suffering, cruelty, crime, abuse, etc; and typically hurts/injures African-American children the most. If everyone [conservatives and liberals] truly had the welfare of these children of poverty in their best interests, then a establishment of abortion/birth control clinics on most street corners would be desireable and promoted. Only when African Americans can become independent, truly educated [by a adequately capable public education system] will they be able to progress economically/financially in life [and not be dependent upon governmental welfare]. As repugnant as abortion is, it is still preferable to bringing children into a world where they will be improsoned in a lifetime of poverty, crime and abuse. The answer/solution is not adoption either, since the the adoption rate of black children by non-African American individuals is miniscule. Wholesale birth control dispensation and use is the preferable answer, but abortion must be considered as a last resort solution to this racial poverty situation!!!!!!!!
jawin| 1.26.11 @ 4:54PM
What fatalism! "They're gonna have awful lives anyway. We might as well kill them to relieve them of the impending misery." Life is miserable in Haiti and Ivory Coast...why don't we just go over there and relieve them of their misery, too; especially since things will only get worse the longer they exist?
Ugh!! Grotesque!! Such cold and calculated callousness. I'm sure this fits Obama's logic perfectly. He certainly doesn't mind giving up on people.
Thank God people like SCJ Clarence Thomas and econmist Thomas Sowell weren't subjected to your vile fatalism. Our country is a better place with them in it, and would be even more so without the stain of abortion.