The New York Times reports that Darfur is on the precipice of a catastrophe. The 7,000 member African Union force is proving ineffective, the rebel groups have not signed on to the U. N. agreement, and the goverenment of Darfur is poised to strike. The pieces are in place for a large-scale military conflict that would devastate the people of Darfur. “So far, negotiations over a proposed United Nations force to shore up the shaky peace in Darfur have limped along with no sign of compromise. The opposing sides in the conflict now seem headed toward a large-scale military confrontation, bringing Darfur to the edge of a new abyss —…
-
-
Propaganda and “Plan B”
The FDA has just approved the use of a non-prescription “morning after” pill. According to the Associated Press, “Women may buy the morning-after pill without a prescription — but only with proof they’re 18 or older” (source).Anyone who reads this blog knows that I believe this to be a tragic development. I say that because the so-called “morning after” pill can act as an abortifacient. How does “Plan B” work? It is essentially a heavier dose of birth control pills that a woman takes within 72 hours of sexual intercourse. The “emergency contraception” works to restrict ovulation in a woman. But it also can act after conception by blocking implantation…
-
Embryonic Stem-Cell Research: Okay after All?
Today’s New York Times reports that “Biologists have developed a technique for establishing colonies of human embryonic stem cells from an early human embryo without destroying it. This method, if confirmed in other laboratories, would seem to remove the principal objection to the research” (source).If this article is any indication, I think the proponents of this research have yet to grasp the moral implications of experimenting on embryonic humans. While we can be thankful that this new technigue doesn’t kill the embryo, there still remains the obvious ethical problem of using human beings for spare parts. Moreover, this new technique doesn’t even address the widespread practice of in vitro fertilization…
-
The Bush Doctrine: Alive and Well
In a recent issue of Commentary Magazine, Norman Podhoretz says that the Bush doctrine is alive and well. He contradicts mischaracterizations of the Bush doctrine that allege the Bush doctrine to be an ideology of unilateralism. Podhoretz shows that many of Bush’s detractors simply misrepresent and misunderstand what the Bush doctrine is.Readers of this blog know that I am in fundamental agreement with Podhoretz on this one (see my “Time Magazine Takes a Whack at Bush and Misses“). I commend to you Podhoretz’s full essay: “Is the Bush Doctrine Dead.”
-
Petitioning for Life: A Story of Survival
In today’s Wall Street Journal, Julia Gorin declares “I was not aborted.” Why is she making this proclamation? She is responding to a petition being circulated by Ms. Magazine that invites women to declare publicly “I had an abortion.” It’s hard to believe that anyone (even readers of Ms. Magazine) would relish the opportunity to announce such a thing, but Ms. Gorin thinks that the antidote to such foolishness is for nearly-aborted people to tell their own stories.Ms. Gorin does tell her story in this piece, and it is a poignant and powerful narrative of her mother’s decision to buck the Soviet norm in order to have a second child.…
-
Hezbollah Balks: Is Anyone Surprised?
“Hezbollah refused to disarm and withdraw its fighters from the battle-scarred hills along the border with Israel on Tuesday, threatening to delay deployment of the Lebanese army and endangering a fragile cease-fire” (Washington Post).Is anyone surprised that Hezbollah is refusing to disarm and to pull out of South Lebanon? Is anyone one surprised that Hezbollah is jeopardizing the cease-fire brokered at the U.N.? Does anyone have any more doubts about who is gunning for a prolonged fight? I hope not. Read on: “Hezbollah Balks At Withdrawal From the South” – Washington Post
-
Ned Lamont: Karl Rove’s Dream Come True
In today’s Wall Street Journal, Martin Peretz boils down what’s at stake in the much ballyhooed senatorial contest in Conneticut between Joe Lieberman and Ned Lamont. The contest in Connecticut tomorrow is about two views of the world. Mr. Lamont’s view is that there are very few antagonists whom we cannot mollify or conciliate. Let’s call this process by its correct name: appeasement. The Greenwich entrepreneur might call it “incentivization.” Mr. Lieberman’s view is that there are actually enemies who, intoxicated by millennial delusions, are not open to rational and reciprocal arbitration. Why should they be? After all, they inhabit a universe of inevitability, rather like Nazis and communists, but…
-
Too Wimpy To Win the War?
John Podhoretz of the New York Post poses a set of questions that we would all do well to ponder: WHAT if liberal democracies have now evolved to a point where they can no longer wage war effectively because they have achieved a level of humanitarian concern for others that dwarfs any really cold-eyed pursuit of their own national interests? . . . Could World War II have been won by Britain and the United States if the two countries did not have it in them to firebomb Dresden and nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Didn’t the willingness of their leaders to inflict mass casualties on civilians indicate a cold-eyed singleness…
-
Moral Equivalence?
I am watching world reaction to the tragedy that occurred in Qana, Lebanon, and I am stunned that world opinion continues to make a moral equivalence between the actions of the state of Israel and those of the Hezbollah. I am not speaking as a person who thinks Israel has a divine-right to the land that they occupy. Nevertheless, they are a democracy that is defending itself from the attacks of a vicious terrorist group. How can Israel acquiesce to a cease-fire while Hezbollah continues to fire rockets at their cities?Dan Gillerman, the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, summed up the difference between Israel and Hezbollah on “Meet the…
-
The U.N. Rebukes U.S. for Its Response to Katrina
I cannot comment yet on this story just released from the Associated Press. This is one of those moments in which I need to just stop, take a deep breath, and count to ten.Here’s the lead from the story: The United States must better protect poor people and African-Americans in natural disasters to avoid problems like those after Hurricane Katrina, a U.N. human rights panel said Friday. The U.N. Human Rights Committee said poor and black Americans were “disadvantaged” after Katrina, and the U.S. should work harder to ensure that their rights “are fully taken into consideration in the reconstruction plans with regard to access to housing, education and health…