This one goes out to all the catholics in the house (Holla for Holy Water, ya'll!).
As many of you may know, the University of Notre Dame asked President Obama to speak at commencement this year, which has caused quite the kerfuffle.
Many catholics oppose this choice primarily because of Obama's liberal stance on abortion - as a Sentor for both Illinois and the United States he voted several times against any legeslation he felt inhibited a woman's right to choose.
However, he's the sixth President to speak at Notre Dame, the others being George W. Bush, George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, and John F. Kennedy. So, riddle us this Catholics-who-are-up-in-arms...can you possibly think of any moral issues you might have with these five?
For starters, let's take the first three who were pro (in W.'s case VERY pro) death penalty. It's been a while since we saw Dead Man Walking, but we're pretty sure you oppose that.
Also, Jimmy Carter supported legal abortion his entire political career, and we already know you oppose that.
Also, we don't know if you've heard, but baptised-and-confirmed catholic John F. Kennedy was known to cheat on his wife once or thrice and, again, last time we checked adultery was something the Pope could excommunicate you for.
Clearly abortion is a hot topic, and one on which we have a particular opinion. Generally we keep it to ourselves because, when brought up, it's sure to either kill conversation entirely or incite it with a passion that burns like the fire of a thousand suns. But does the fact that it's so polarizing mean it should be the central issue of whether or not Obama is fit to be a graduation speaker? Is this the topic people think he's planning on covering during his commencement address?
Is this really about Obama's stance on abortion, or is this just a reason for republican Newt Gingrich to go on FOX News last Sunday and launch another visible attack against the sitting Democratic President?
We think politics should be left out of this situation, and private universities should be able to invite a speaker they feel would most benefit the grads. But, since we're nothing if not democratic here at MEvBLOG...we'll let you decide.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Touchdown Jesus wept
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
One didn't hear any whoopty doo over the really LATE term abortions set loose upon the thousands of our military men and women who died needlessly in the two (or more) misbegotten wars by BOTH Bush presidents, nor any of the little "conflicts" that other presidents sent our young off to suffer and die in.
Every chance they get, they should at least try not to be hypocrites.
I know, it's hard.
RE: Anne
While I agree with your ire over the wars, I don't see either being compared to abortion.
I'm not saying where I stand on this issue, but one could argue that the brave men and women of our armed forces choose to march into battle - whenever, wherever, and declared (even stupidly) by whomever happens to be elected - and an aborted fetus doesn't have that same decision making power.
Definitely a smart identification of hypocrisy in this case, but not the best metaphor I think.
Why does it seem that the only people that can't express their opinions are Christians. A University that is pro-life has a speaker that is proudly pro-abortion and you think its odd that this would raise some questions?
This is like Michael Moore speaking at the NRA.
RE: MC
I only think it's odd in light of the fact that the university in question has invited numerous guests in the past with whom they've disagreed.
Based on ND's own track record, I'm just curious what makes this one different from the others.
And I don't think Christians should be barred from expressing their opinions...in fact, I'd like for you to point out where in the post I either said or inferred that.
Also...if Micheal Moore spoke at the NRA I would TOTALLY buy a ticket. Can you imagine? You know it would be kinda awesome.
As to Christians not being allowed to speak their opinions, I just did and so did you. If you think we are being suppressed, speech wise, go check out the Bayou part of this paper! Just people have different opinions, (real or imagined) doesn't mean you have to shut up.
This country still has free speech, so it's not needful to make yourself a victim...of what?
I may not agree with what you say, but i would fight to the death for your right to say it.
I didn't mean to imply that you were barring Christians for speaking, it was a general statement. In fact, I agree with the premise of your entry. If you have the opportunity to have a President speak at your graduation, you take it no matter what, unless it Jimmy Carter of course.
Anne, you are right we all have a right to free speech. I guess I'm speaking more to the reaction when Christian values are discussed. We don't need to look any further than Miss California. I have no idea if she is a Christian but people tried to destroyer her because she stated that she felt that marriage was between a man and a women. Not an extreme view, in fact most Democrat leader share her opinion but the "media" was outraged. It just seems that the "media" is accepting of every idea as long as it doesn't align with Christian values.
RE: MC
I don't know if the media was outraged as much as it was ready to cover the very vocal Californians who opposed her.
I'm not saying it's right - I actually agree that she got the short end of the stick for expressing her own opinion.
It's just that she made good television.
That's another pet peeve of mine, Miss America, Great Thinker of Really Deep Thoughts. Truly, it's a BEAUTY PAGEANT, not a Mensa scoring smackdown. I know, I know, there have been many smart as a whip Miss Americas but what's the point of asking them loaded questions such as that? It smacks of gotcha "journalism" and no matter what she answered, someone would get all huffy over it.
She isn't responsible for world peace, the vanishing polar bears or California wildfires.
If the people questioning her were after anything but seeing a pretty woman in an uncomfortable position, shame on them. Getting someone with some conviction and brains is awfully hard for some people to fathom.
Gotcha journalism is showing it's ugly face again.
Post a Comment