George Will comments on the chilling video of a Planned Parenthood spokesman in Florida defending the right to infanticide. He writes: Recently in Florida, Alisa LaPolt Snow, representing Florida Planned Parenthood organizations, testified against a bill that would require abortionists to provide medical care to babies who survive attempted abortions. Snow was asked: “If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?” Snow replied: “We believe that any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family and the physician.” She added, “That decision should…
-
-
MSNBC host says kids belong to communities not to their families
The video above is something that you almost have to see in order to believe. MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry is making a pitch for one of MSNBC’s “lean forward” ads, and she suggests that children do not belong to their parents but to their communities. In her own words: We have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to their communities. She goes on to argue that once our society acknowledges that families are not the central context for child-rearing, then we will be able to “invest” more tax dollars in public…
-
How the debate over gay marriage is stifled
Here’s how the debate over gay marriage is often stifled. For many proponents, they simply rule out a priori any suggestion that people aren’t free to do whatever they want to do sexually. Of course no one actually believes this in principle (notice that no one is arguing to abolish incest laws), but it nevertheless is the most common argument in favor of legal gay marriage. This notion is now deeply embedded within popular culture, as David Letterman’s words to Rachel Maddow so vividly illustrate. Watch above or read them below: It is absolutely stupidity. Humans have the right to do what humans do, that’s it. End of the story.…
-
Jeremy Irons on gay marriage: “Could a father not marry his son?”
Our nation seems to be embarking upon an enormous social experiment with what seems to be the inevitable advent of same-sex marriage across the country. I do not think we have even begun to contemplate seriously what the implications of this experiment will be, but I feel quite certain that there will be unintended consequences that we will have to deal with on the fly.
-
Ross Douthat on Gay Marriage and Historical Amnesia
Ross Douthat is getting some push-back on a column he wrote over the weekend about gay marriage. In a blog post today, therefore, he offers a rejoinder. He argues that gay marriage proponents have “historical amnesia” when they claim that marriage’s legal connection to procreation is a new idea invented by conservatives to oppress gay persons. He shows convincingly from the historical record that this is not the case and then concludes with this: That so many people find this claim credible or even self-evident is a small but potent example of exactly the two phenemona that my column’s conclusion discussed: First, the way that gay marriage inevitably has widening…
-
Planned Parenthood spokesperson supports infanticide
The video above is just too shocking for words, but make no mistake. It is the logical implication of the pro-choice position. If an unborn baby at 7-months has no right to life inside the womb, then why would he have a right to life outside? Consistent pro-choicers know this, and that’s why some of them—like the Planned Parenthood spokesperson above—has no problem supporting infanticide. Here’s the report from The Weekly Standard:
-
What I observed this week in the debate about gay marriage
This week has been a watershed moment for the fortunes of marriage in our culture. I’ve been following the discussion with great interest, including listening to oral arguments that were made before the Supreme Court on Tuesday and Wednesday (here and here). Without question, the most significant thing that I have noticed in debates both inside and outside the Court has been the utter lack of moral argument. This was brought home in spades on Wednesday when Justice Elena Kagan highlighted a statement made by the House Judiciary Committee in 1996 when the Defense of Marriage Act was passed. Here are the critical lines:
-
How not to have a debate about gay marriage
One of the things that has become increasingly clear in the debate about gay marriage in this country is that proponents do not really want to have a debate. They have already decided that traditional marriage supporters are ignorant rubes at best or bigots at worst. In either case, there is no reason to take traditional marriage supporters seriously, and they can be safely dismissed as a part of a dying minority.
-
The Supreme Court shows its on hand on its forthcoming gay marriage ruling
As you no doubt have heard, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments today on the question of gay marriage (audio below and transcript here). At issue is California’s 2008 law banning gay marriage, Proposition 8. A lower court has struck down this law duly enacted by California voters, and now the question is whether or not SCOTUS will uphold the lower court or overturn it.
-
Ryan Anderson on MSNBC talking about Gay Marriage cases before the Supreme Court
Ryan Anderson is one of the co-authors of the watershed book in favor of traditional marriage What is Marriage? He is one of the most articulate proponents of traditional marriage, and he appeared on MSNBC over the weekend to debate the issue. The program featured Anderson versus three advocates of legal gay marriage. When Anderson was allowed to talk, he did a fantastic job. But what is interesting about this exchange is how little the host and the other guests let him talk. Anderson’s rebuttals were cut off, but his opponents’ rebuttals were not. It was very clear that this was not an equal time thing. Both the moderator and…