Politics

Politics

  • Obama

    Votes: 4 1.1%
  • Romney

    Votes: 172 48.9%
  • Other

    Votes: 46 13.1%
  • a:3:{i:1637;a:5:{s:12:"polloptionid";i:1637;s:6:"nodeid";s:7:"2882145";s:5:"title";s:5:"Obama";s:5:"

    Votes: 130 36.9%

  • Total voters
    352

NDVirginia19

Rally
Messages
4,426
Reaction score
5,133
Can you rephrase that, as I have no idea what you are trying to say.

I think he's trying to say that at the majority of academic institutions, a left leaning speaker would not have any push back from the student population, when consistently conservative speakers are protested and pushed back against
 

woolybug25

#1 Vineyard Vines Fan
Messages
17,677
Reaction score
3,018
https://www.facebook.com/events/996645333748543/

Again, I'm not saying she shouldn't be allowed to speak on campus, I'm just surprised that a Notre Dame department is being allowed by the university to sponsor the event.

You're gonna have to actually pull quotes here, I don't have FB. When I go to the link, it clearly states "Notre Dame College Democrats Present". It is clearly sponsored by a club, not by a department. I'm sure they are involved, but again... clubs are allowed to bring speakers to the campus. That's part of having clubs.
 

NDVirginia19

Rally
Messages
4,426
Reaction score
5,133
"The College Democrats of Notre Dame are honored to present our 2016 speaker: Wendy Davis! This event is also cosponsored by the Progressive Student Alliance, Notre Dames, Women in Politics, bridgeND, and the Department of Gender Studies.

On Monday, April 4th, Wendy Davis will give a talk and answer student questions during a Q&A in Debartolo Hall 101 at 6:30pm.

Former Texas State Senator Wendy Davis is widely recognized as a passionate advocate for women’s healthcare and other national issues which threaten our individual freedoms. Sen. Davis prides herself on the ability to see an issue from multiple perspectives, while forging a path to consensus and compromise. She skyrocketed to near celebrity status after her historic 13 hour filibuster in the Texas Senate to stop a legislative effort that would have dramatically reduced women’s access to healthcare services in her state.

Wendy Davis, a modern-day Texas heroine, appeared on the national scene as a State Senator during her 2013 filibuster that temporarily blocked devastating legislation seeking to limit women’s access to abortions and reproductive healthcare in the state of Texas. Before that, Davis fought tirelessly in the Texas legislature to further equality for women through education, fair lending, and equal pay initiatives. A single mother from humble beginnings who worked her way to Harvard Law, Davis shares her inspiring story of overcoming adversity, fear, and self-doubt to reach these incredible heights and underscores the importance of how every woman’s story can make a difference."
 

Rack Em

Community Bod
Messages
7,089
Reaction score
2,727
You're gonna have to actually pull quotes here, I don't have FB. When I go to the link, it clearly states "Notre Dame College Democrats Present". It is clearly sponsored by a club, not by a department. I'm sure they are involved, but again... clubs are allowed to bring speakers to the campus. That's part of having clubs.

There you go, being a turd sandwich again.

TURDSANDWICH.png~c200
 

NorthDakota

Grandson of Loomis
Messages
15,695
Reaction score
5,995
"The College Democrats of Notre Dame are honored to present our 2016 speaker: Wendy Davis! This event is also cosponsored by the Progressive Student Alliance, Notre Dames, Women in Politics, bridgeND, and the Department of Gender Studies.

On Monday, April 4th, Wendy Davis will give a talk and answer student questions during a Q&A in Debartolo Hall 101 at 6:30pm.

Former Texas State Senator Wendy Davis is widely recognized as a passionate advocate for women’s healthcare and other national issues which threaten our individual freedoms. Sen. Davis prides herself on the ability to see an issue from multiple perspectives, while forging a path to consensus and compromise. She skyrocketed to near celebrity status after her historic 13 hour filibuster in the Texas Senate to stop a legislative effort that would have dramatically reduced women’s access to healthcare services in her state.

Wendy Davis, a modern-day Texas heroine, appeared on the national scene as a State Senator during her 2013 filibuster that temporarily blocked devastating legislation seeking to limit women’s access to abortions and reproductive healthcare in the state of Texas. Before that, Davis fought tirelessly in the Texas legislature to further equality for women through education, fair lending, and equal pay initiatives. A single mother from humble beginnings who worked her way to Harvard Law, Davis shares her inspiring story of overcoming adversity, fear, and self-doubt to reach these incredible heights and underscores the importance of how every woman’s story can make a difference."

That makes her sound like a rockstar. :(
 

Rack Em

Community Bod
Messages
7,089
Reaction score
2,727
You're gonna have to actually pull quotes here, I don't have FB. When I go to the link, it clearly states "Notre Dame College Democrats Present". It is clearly sponsored by a club, not by a department. I'm sure they are involved, but again... clubs are allowed to bring speakers to the campus. That's part of having clubs.

If they're bringing her in due to her abortion filibuster because she's the "Great Left Crusader", I have a problem with that.

If she's talking about an endangered owl population or something stupid, then I don't have a problem.
 

NDVirginia19

Rally
Messages
4,426
Reaction score
5,133
"A Modern Day Texas Heroine"

A Modern Day Texas Heroine that wasn't able to win the women vote as a woman running as a democrat
 

IrishJayhawk

Rock Chalk
Messages
7,181
Reaction score
464
If they're bringing her in due to her abortion filibuster because she's the "Great Left Crusader", I have a problem with that.

If she's talking about an endangered owl population or something stupid, then I don't have a problem.

Isn't this what people are complaining about in the PC thread with the political leanings reversed?
 

NDVirginia19

Rally
Messages
4,426
Reaction score
5,133
If they're bringing her in due to her abortion filibuster because she's the "Great Left Crusader", I have a problem with that.

If she's talking about an endangered owl population or something stupid, then I don't have a problem.

See I don't even give a damn if she wanted to talk about abortion, I think she should have the right, I just don't think a university department should be sponsoring a speech about it.
 

Ndaccountant

Old Hoss
Messages
8,370
Reaction score
5,771
Can you rephrase that, as I have no idea what you are trying to say.

Your calling for openness of thought and opinion on ND's campus is ironic, considering that across the nation there is a total lack of political diversity in similar venues. Hell, Oxford University Press just recently published an article on this very topic.
 
Last edited:

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
She's being sponsored by a couple clubs as well as the Department of Gender Studies. But Milo Yiannapolous and Christina Hoff Summers are both coming Wednesday night too, so it balances out I suppose.

It really doesn't "balance out".

Classic. Like Fr. Ted said, Catholic education is inherently a "crossroad." But I don't understand why it continues to pick up scary hitchhikers with knives and drug habits at the intersection.

Because ND too often allows secular American politics to frame a debate, instead of Catholic doctrine.

You guys are hilarious. What Lightening conveniently left out was that the College Democrats are the ones that spearheaded it. Are they not allowed to have events or speakers? I also haven't seen anything regarding "praising her for her stance on abortion" by any Notre Dame faculty member. Are we supposed to waive our fingers and boo any time a club brings a Democrat onto the campus? It's a college campus for crying out loud.

One could defend honoring prominent Democrats like Obama and Biden on the grounds that they belong to a broad coalition and their individual culpability for promoting abortion is minimal. But Wendy Davis is famous for nothing but promoting abortion. Having the Notre Dame College Democrats invite her to speak at the nation's most prominent Catholic university should be as scandalous as a student group at Howard inviting David Duke to speak. The fact that it's not says a lot about the state of ND (and none of it good).

Any chance some of you get to huff and puff about abortion you take. You rarely even look at the scenario or circumstance. Just judge first and ask questions... well... never....

This is absurd, wooly. No one is condemning a particular woman for having had an abortion. ND is the flagship Catholic university in America. Catholics believe that abortion is a grave evil comparable to apartheid and genocide. Politicians who actively promote such evil simply shouldn't be invited to speak at Catholic colleges.

Where are the links for this stuff? You are making a lot of claims with no references.

Furthermore, are you saying that the College Democrats should only be able to have people come in that fit your agenda? They can't have pro-choice speakers?

Not at a Catholic university, no.

Again, I'm not saying she shouldn't be allowed to speak on campus, I'm just surprised that a Notre Dame department is being allowed by the university to sponsor the event.

I'll go ahead and say it. She shouldn't be allowed to promote abortion at a Catholic school. Shame on ND for allowing it.
 

NDVirginia19

Rally
Messages
4,426
Reaction score
5,133
About what I expected... a lot of pretty bad logic on Davis' part.

"Only about 1% of abortions happen after the 20 week mark, so why worry about legislating against it?"

"Abortion is a protected right by law, and that is what I stand for, we should in no circumstance try to limit it"
*Proceeds to talk about limiting gun ownership*

"All of these people are only supporting legislation that limits the reproductive rights of women because they want to use it as a political ploy"
Yep: According to Davis, we don't oppose abortion on moral grounds, we are just petty political monsters who are, in her logic, infringing on the rights of 50% of the population in an attempt to garner support? That makes sense.
 

Ndaccountant

Old Hoss
Messages
8,370
Reaction score
5,771
A friend of mine from Chicago sent me this today......

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/arti...rsities-should-stop-wealth-hoarding-and-share

A snapshot from Chicago: In the past few weeks, as faculty and staff at Chicago State University reviewed their pink slips and those at Northeastern Illinois University learned about mandatory furloughs amounting to 20 percent pay cuts, the University of Chicago announced a $35 million gift from the founder of an investment firm to establish a “new think tank to research urban issues.” It received another $10 million donation from the Pritzker family to fund “Urban Labs” that will support research addressing the “big challenges cities face.”

In fact, these donations are one of the challenges. Another is what can only be termed “wealth-hoarding” by private universities.

Our criticism of these large donations to the tax-exempt University of Chicago, which has a $7.5 billion endowment, are undoubtedly sour grapes: We teach at institutions of higher education experiencing endless belt-tightening and wage losses, and which, like most public colleges and universities, have no big donors on the horizon.

In Illinois, it is now nine months since the state has had a budget. While some essential services are funded through a court order, higher education is not among them. Monetary Award Program grants, which support approximately 125,000 students at public and private institutions in Illinois, have not received funds, and Gov. Bruce Rauner recently vetoed a bill that would have restored just these grants. Even when, or if, a state budget passes, the governor has proposed a 31 percent cut to public higher education.

Some public institutions, including Illinois State University and the University of Illinois, have some financial reserves to help them weather this budget impasse. But the public universities in Illinois that serve the greatest number of working poor and first-generation college-goers do not. The lack of a state budget, in combination with the refusal to fund MAP grants, has created an unprecedented, but not unforeseen, crisis.

Despite an increased demand for higher education since the 1970s, state support for public colleges and universities has been declining since for decades. The results?

Student debt topped $1.2 trillion in 2014; 7 million of those debt holders are in default; and black and low-income student enrollment has dwindled.

In this context, offering mass amounts of private wealth to already hugely wealthy private institutions is scandalous. “Not Very Giving,” a 2013 New York Times opinion piece, suggested that private giving should be aggregated across K-12 schools and, specifically, that these resources should be channeled to less wealthy districts, because, “at a time of rising inequality, school foundations must shrink—not widen—the gap between rich and poor.” This is still a great suggestion. In fact, because the overwhelming majority of people who go on to postsecondary education attend public community colleges and state universities, it should be applied to public schools at all levels. Clearly, there is enough wealth for all; it is dispersal that is the problem.

Our modest proposal, then, is that the University of Chicago and similarly well-endowed private institutions should share their assets with Chicago State, Northeastern Illinois and other struggling public schools. Our students are incredible. They can also conduct exemplary research and can offer the best solutions and policies for the communities in which they live.

Or, better yet, why not nationalize the private universities so that all students in Chicago, from all communities, can benefit from their excellent resources?

Research isn't necessary to understand that sharing, not hoarding, is central to solving the “urban problems” of the day.

Erica R. Meiners is a professor of education and gender and women's studies at Northeastern Illinois University. Therese Quinn is an associate professor of art history and director of museum and exhibition studies at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
 

Legacy

New member
Messages
7,871
Reaction score
321
From Whiskeyjack's post above:
Because ND too often allows secular American politics to frame a debate, instead of Catholic doctrine.

Notre Dame has been framing the debate on their independence from being dictated to by Catholic doctrine for over fifty years. They will continue to reject that external authority. Catholic universities are not parishes or sees or an arm of the Church enforcing dogma. Fr Hesburgh and the other prominent heads of Catholic universities in the U.S. produced the "Land of Lakes" statement that began:
“To perform its teaching and research functions effectively the Catholic university must have a true autonomy and academic freedom in the face of authority of whatever kind, lay or clerical, external to the academic community itself.”

In 1972, Hesburgh, as a delegate to the International Congress of Catholic Universities on Vatican grounds, and was faced with the Vatican's intent to impose Catholic doctrine as the framework for the conduct of American colleges. He threatened to walk out with the rest of the American university heads.

Ex Corde Ecclesiae in 1991 and its application by American bishops to Catholic universities in 2001 framed another debate between the Church and the universities on the imposition of doctrine. The mission, ideals, principles, teaching and guidance are not compromised in the eyes of American universities and are consistant with this. The Bishop of Fort Wayne may disagree as many others. ND still considers itself to be a Catholic university.

One could defend honoring prominent Democrats like Obama and Biden on the grounds that they belong to a broad coalition and their individual culpability for promoting abortion is minimal. But Wendy Davis is famous for nothing but promoting abortion. Having the Notre Dame College Democrats invite her to speak at the nation's most prominent Catholic university should be as scandalous as a student group at Howard inviting David Duke to speak. The fact that it's not says a lot about the state of ND (and none of it good).

I'm sure you are aware of Georgetown's invitation to speak for Planned Parenthood's president, Cecile Richards, this year and of Villanova's 2014 commencement speaker, Jill Biden. You should add Georgetown, America's oldest (and Jesuit) Catholic university. Or is there something else at work here unique to universities? Mario Cuoma spoke at ND in 1984, "Religious Belief and Public Morality: A Catholic Governor's Perspective", saying:
Specifically, must politics and religion in America divide our loyalties? Does the "separation between church and state" imply separation between religion and politics? Between morality and government? Are these different propositions? Even more specifically, what is the relationship of my Catholicism to my politics? Where does the one end and other begin? Or are the two divided at all? And if they're not, should they be?

Should not these questions be asked at Notre Dame? (I know you answered it below.)

This is absurd, wooly. No one is condemning a particular woman for having had an abortion. ND is the flagship Catholic university in America. Catholics believe that abortion is a grave evil comparable to apartheid and genocide. Politicians who actively promote such evil simply shouldn't be invited to speak at Catholic colleges.

Not at a Catholic university, no.
I'll go ahead and say it. She shouldn't be allowed to promote abortion at a Catholic school. Shame on ND for allowing it.

We can begin by your acknowledgement that Notre Dame is a Catholic university and that the University, as you said, did not invite her. Davis "promoted abortion" in her speech? Or is her invitation best framed as Cuomo said:
And if we do it right -- if we're not afraid of the truth even when the truth is complex -- this debate, by clarification, can bring relief to untold numbers of confused -- even anguished -- Catholics, as well as to many others who want only to make our already great democracy even stronger than it is.

ND has often had speakers of different faiths and differing viewpoints from Catholic doctrine.

I'll end with one of the points of Ex Corde Ecclesiae:
“A Catholic University possesses the autonomy necessary to develop its distinctive identity and pursue its proper mission. Freedom in research and teaching is recognized and respected according to the principles and methods of each individual discipline, so long as the rights of the individual and of the community are preserved within the confines of the truth and the common good.”

If you compare the Land of Lakes quote above to this one from Ex Corde Ecclesiae, they are quite similar. That's one reason why ND considers itself a Catholic university and for many other reasons a "flagship" one, in your terms.

I doubt whether Davis would have been a speaker without the presence of women in our university. As a result of women's impact, for instance, ND has Gender studies and Vagina Monologues - the debate over which occasioned Father Jenkins to say:
"We are committed to a wide-open, unconstrained search for truth, and we are convinced that Catholic teaching has nothing to fear from engaging the wider culture."
 
Last edited:

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
Ex Corde Ecclesiae in 1991 and its application by American bishops to Catholic universities in 2001 framed another debate between the Church and the universities on the imposition of doctrine. The mission, ideals, principles, teaching and guidance are not compromised in the eyes of American universities and are consistant with this. The Bishop of Fort Wayne may disagree as many others. ND still considers itself to be a Catholic university.

What does that even mean then, to be a Catholic university? If you read Hesburgh to mean that academic integrity requires embracing a moral relativism under which Church Doctrine is just one "tradition" among many others, then how is ND any different from every other American university?

I'm sure you are aware of Georgetown's invitation to speak for Planned Parenthood's president, Cecile Richards, this year and of Villanova's 2014 commencement speaker, Jill Biden. You should add Georgetown, America's oldest (and Jesuit) Catholic university. Or is there something else at work here unique to universities? Mario Cuoma spoke at ND in 1984, Religious Belief and Public Morality: A Catholic Governor's Perspective, saying:

Should not these questions be asked at Notre Dame? (I know you answered it below.)

I am aware, and it's disgraceful. Abortion is not a subject over which reasonable Catholics can disagree. The fact that some of our own institutions are so corrupt and/or confused that they not only fail to defend the unborn, but that they honor those promoting the practice, is a serious indictment of American Catholicism.

But I'm glad you brought up Georgetown, because it's Exhibit 1A of what will happen to ND if it emulates its secular peers instead of embracing the Catholic tradition which put it on the map. Georgetown used to be recognized as one of the best schools in the nation. Now it's a second rate school with a second rate faculty, where many of its students are unaware of its Catholic roots and cannot even pronounce "Jesuit". It's a fall-back option for wealthy East Coasters who don't get into more prestigious schools, mainly because of its desirable location. And South Bend ain't DC, so we won't even have that going for us.

We can begin by your acknowledgement that Notre Dame is a Catholic university and that the University, as you said, did not invite her.

All clubs are sanctioned by ND, and speakers have be vetted by the admin before they're invited to campus. There's no way that ND would sanction a neo-nazi or white supremacist club, nor would they allow a club to invite David Duke or the leader of say, the Greek Golden Dawn party. They shouldn't have given Wendy Davis a platform for the same reason.

ND has often had speakers of different faiths and differing viewpoints from Catholic doctrine.

And I hope ND continues to do so. But when it comes to abortion, there is great moral confusion among American Catholics partly because our institutions fail to address it like the grave moral evil it is. Hesburgh didn't hide behind squishy talk about the importance of "dialogue" with racists; he publicly condemned it at every opportunity, and he worked tirelessly to dismantle the laws that supported apartheid. Notre Dame's ongoing failure to address abortion the same way is shameful, and a major disservice to American Catholics.
 

BobbyMac

Staff & Stuff
Staff member
Messages
33,950
Reaction score
9,294

I just threw up in my mouth. What are these people complaining about? The Pritzker's gave ti to the most liberal University in the Midwest. They will stay true to the cause and have the ability to actually produce some findings. Plus, who seriously would endow NE Ill or CSU? You may as well gift the money to the University of Phoenix.

I won't even touch the call for private funds to be nationalized except to point out all of the hard hitting social research being done at Venezuelan Universities today.
 

BobbyMac

Staff & Stuff
Staff member
Messages
33,950
Reaction score
9,294
It really doesn't "balance out".
Because ND too often allows secular American politics to frame a debate, instead of Catholic doctrine.
One could defend honoring prominent Democrats like Obama and Biden on the grounds that they belong to a broad coalition and their individual culpability for promoting abortion is minimal. But Wendy Davis is famous for nothing but promoting abortion. Having the Notre Dame College Democrats invite her to speak at the nation's most prominent Catholic university should be as scandalous as a student group at Howard inviting David Duke to speak. The fact that it's not says a lot about the state of ND (and none of it good).
This is absurd, wooly. No one is condemning a particular woman for having had an abortion. ND is the flagship Catholic university in America. Catholics believe that abortion is a grave evil comparable to apartheid and genocide. Politicians who actively promote such evil simply shouldn't be invited to speak at Catholic colleges.
Not at a Catholic university, no.
I'll go ahead and say it. She shouldn't be allowed to promote abortion at a Catholic school. Shame on ND for allowing it.

What does that even mean then, to be a Catholic university? If you read Hesburgh to mean that academic integrity requires embracing a moral relativism under which Church Doctrine is just one "tradition" among many others, then how is ND any different from every other American university?
I am aware, and it's disgraceful. Abortion is not a subject over which reasonable Catholics can disagree. The fact that some of our own institutions are so corrupt and/or confused that they not only fail to defend the unborn, but that they honor those promoting the practice, is a serious indictment of American Catholicism.
But I'm glad you brought up Georgetown, because it's Exhibit 1A of what will happen to ND if it emulates its secular peers instead of embracing the Catholic tradition which put it on the map. Georgetown used to be recognized as one of the best schools in the nation. Now it's a second rate school with a second rate faculty, where many of its students are unaware of its Catholic roots and cannot even pronounce "Jesuit". It's a fall-back option for wealthy East Coasters who don't get into more prestigious schools, mainly because of its desirable location. And South Bend ain't DC, so we won't even have that going for us.
All clubs are sanctioned by ND, and speakers have be vetted by the admin before they're invited to campus. There's no way that ND would sanction a neo-nazi or white supremacist club, nor would they allow a club to invite David Duke or the leader of say, the Greek Golden Dawn party. They shouldn't have given Wendy Davis a platform for the same reason.And I hope ND continues to do so. But when it comes to abortion, there is great moral confusion among American Catholics partly because our institutions fail to address it like the grave moral evil it is. Hesburgh didn't hide behind squishy talk about the importance of "dialogue" with racists; he publicly condemned it at every opportunity, and he worked tirelessly to dismantle the laws that supported apartheid. Notre Dame's ongoing failure to address abortion the same way is shameful, and a major disservice to American Catholics.

Whiskey, thank you. Always a pleasure to read your words. Clarity is a lost art.
 

Legacy

New member
Messages
7,871
Reaction score
321
What does that even mean then, to be a Catholic university? If you read Hesburgh to mean that academic integrity requires embracing a moral relativism under which Church Doctrine is just one "tradition" among many others, then how is ND any different from every other American university?


I am aware, and it's disgraceful. Abortion is not a subject over which reasonable Catholics can disagree. The fact that some of our own institutions are so corrupt and/or confused that they not only fail to defend the unborn, but that they honor those promoting the practice, is a serious indictment of American Catholicism.

But I'm glad you brought up Georgetown, because it's Exhibit 1A of what will happen to ND if it emulates its secular peers instead of embracing the Catholic tradition which put it on the map. Georgetown used to be recognized as one of the best schools in the nation. Now it's a second rate school with a second rate faculty, where many of its students are unaware of its Catholic roots and cannot even pronounce "Jesuit". It's a fall-back option for wealthy East Coasters who don't get into more prestigious schools, mainly because of its desirable location. And South Bend ain't DC, so we won't even have that going for us.



All clubs are sanctioned by ND, and speakers have be vetted by the admin before they're invited to campus. There's no way that ND would sanction a neo-nazi or white supremacist club, nor would they allow a club to invite David Duke or the leader of say, the Greek Golden Dawn party. They shouldn't have given Wendy Davis a platform for the same reason.



And I hope ND continues to do so. But when it comes to abortion, there is great moral confusion among American Catholics partly because our institutions fail to address it like the grave moral evil it is. Hesburgh didn't hide behind squishy talk about the importance of "dialogue" with racists; he publicly condemned it at every opportunity, and he worked tirelessly to dismantle the laws that supported apartheid. Notre Dame's ongoing failure to address abortion the same way is shameful, and a major disservice to American Catholics.


Were you unaware of this from Hesburgh before your condemnation of him and Notre Dame?

Hesburgh on Cuomo: The Overlooked Consensus on Restricting Abortion
 
Last edited:

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
Were you unaware of this from Hesburgh before your condemnation of him and Notre Dame?

Hesburgh on Cuomo: The Overlooked Consensus on Restricting Abortion

(1) I was not aware of it; and (2) how does it refute anything in my post above? Here's the concluding paragraph:

Is making common cause with all those against totally permissive abortion a Catholic position? The bishops' support of the Hatch Amendment was a move in this direction. But generally, the pro-life movement has been for an absolute prohihition of abortion. If such a total solution is not possible in our pluralistic society, and, in fact, was voted down by national referendum in Catholic Italy, will Catholics cooperate with other Americans of good will and ethical conviction to work for a more restrictive abortion law? One might hope so. This would not compromise our belief in the sanctity of all human life. We should continue to hold ourselves to a higher standard than we can persuade society-at-large to write into law. If Catholics would help articulate this consensus, favoring a more restrictive abortion law short of an absolute ban, Catholic politicians would no longer be able (or feel compelled) to say, "I'm against abortion, but . . . ." Catholic and other politicians could even relive the civil rights revolution in an ultimate context of life and death.

Wendy Davis is not in favor of any restrictions on abortion. When a mother elects to have her 7 lb unborn baby vivisected and vacuumed from her womb at 40 weeks, Davis applauds, because her warped feminist viewpoint believes that such license is necessary for the "advancement" of women in society. Yet Notre Dame gave her a platform to further advocate that warped perspective.

Even by the standard he sets for the university in that article, ND has failed.
 
Last edited:

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Shocking to see Wendy Davis invited to Notre Dame to advocate killing unborn persons, asserting somehow that feminism demands it.</p>— Chad Pecknold (@ccpecknold) <a href="https://twitter.com/ccpecknold/status/717431141419106304">April 5, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Wendy Davis claimed women should be free to kill unborn so they can climb social & economic ladders without impediment of child care.</p>— Chad Pecknold (@ccpecknold) <a href="https://twitter.com/ccpecknold/status/717432031869865984">April 5, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

Legacy

New member
Messages
7,871
Reaction score
321
(1) I was not aware of it; and (2) how does it refute anything in my post above? Here's the concluding paragraph:
But generally, the pro-life movement has been for an absolute prohihition of abortion. If such a total solution is not possible in our pluralistic society, and, in fact, was voted down by national referendum in Catholic Italy, will Catholics cooperate with other Americans of good will and ethical conviction to work for a more restrictive abortion law? One might hope so. This would not compromise our belief in the sanctity of all human life. We should continue to hold ourselves to a higher standard than we can persuade society-at-large to write into law. If Catholics would help articulate this consensus, favoring a more restrictive abortion law short of an absolute ban, Catholic politicians would no longer be able (or feel compelled) to say, "I'm against abortion, but . . . ." Catholic and other politicians could even relive the civil rights revolution in an ultimate context of life and death.

Wendy Davis is not in favor of any restrictions on abortion. When a Texan mother elects to have her 7 lb unborn baby vivisected and vacuumed from her womb at 40 weeks, Davis applauds, because her warped feminist viewpoint believes that such license is necessary for the "advancement" of women in society. Yet Notre Dame gave her a platform to further advocate that warped perspective.

Even by the standard he sets for the university in that article, ND has failed.

Thanks for posting that last paragraph, which I was in the process of including. Back to Davis and an absurd and impossible example? As for your scenario, 94.4% of abortions in Texas are done at less than 13 weeks of gestation. 2% of abortions in Texas are done at more than 16 weeks gestation (0.8% at 18-20 weeks, 0.5 % at more than 20 weeks).

I do consider ND's invitation to Cuomo and Hesburgh's response to be more relevant. Refuting? Certainly not. It seems almost exactly what you are saying. What differences do you see?
 
Last edited:

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
Thanks for posting that last paragraph, which I was in the process of including. Back to Davis and an absurd and impossible example? I do consider ND's invitation to Cuomo and Hesburgh's response to be more relevant. Refuting? Certainly not. It seems almost exactly what you are saying. Differences?

Apologies if I misinterpreted your post. Hesburgh seems to be saying that politics is the art of the possible, and that Catholics should be willing to work with others in order to achieve significant restrictions on abortion, rather than insisting on the moral purity of "complete prohibition or nothing"; which is actually how the pro-life movement has operated for decades.

I criticize ND for failing to address abortion with the same moral urgency that Hesburgh brought to the fight against apartheid. He explicitly concedes the similarity in the linked article. I trust you agree that Hesburgh would never have condoned inviting Bull Connor to speak on campus in the interest of "dialogue". I argue that Jenkins should have barred Davis on the same grounds.

To the best of my knowledge, Obama and Biden have consistently opposed even modest restrictions on abortion as well. What sort of message is ND sending by giving the former an honorary degree in 2009 (during my law school graduation), and the latter the Laetare Medal next month?
 

Legacy

New member
Messages
7,871
Reaction score
321
Apologies if I misinterpreted your post. Hesburgh seems to be saying that politics is the art of the possible, and that Catholics should be willing to work with others in order to achieve significant restrictions on abortion, rather than insisting on the moral purity of "complete prohibition or nothing"; which is actually how the pro-life movement has operated for decades.

I criticize ND for failing to address abortion with the same moral urgency that Hesburgh brought to the fight against apartheid. He explicitly concedes the similarity in the linked article. I trust you agree that Hesburgh would never have condoned inviting Bull Connor to speak on campus in the interest of "dialogue". I argue that Jenkins should have barred Davis on the same grounds.

To the best of my knowledge, Obama and Biden have consistently opposed even modest restrictions on abortion as well. What sort of message is ND sending by giving the former an honorary degree in 2009 (during my law school graduation), and the latter the Laetare Medal next month?

No apologies necessary. Part of the dialogue. (I added on some stats on Texas abortions.)

I assume you did not know that George Wallace was invited and spoke at ND? Here's one student's recollection:
Reading the piece on Father Hesburgh and Martin Luther King reminded me of a wonderful thing about Father Ted. In the fall of 1963 the Texas Club at Notre Dame invited George Wallace to speak at Notre Dame. I was an Instructor in the English Department that year. I had met Father Ted in the spring of my freshman year at Notre Dame, 10 years earlier, and had been privileged to talk with him once or twice a year during my undergraduate career. So when I heard that George Wallace was coming to Notre Dame, I went to see Father Ted. I wanted him to veto Wallace’s visit.

Father Ted listened to me, and then said, “Bert, I don’t want him here either. But if I veto his appearance, that will set a very bad precedent. And someday, when somebody else is president of this university, you may want to invite someone like Martin Luther King here to speak, and that president will veto Dr. King’s appearance. I think you should accept that George Wallace is going to speak here, and maybe organize some sort of protest.”

There was a protest by over 400 students. Then the student body president asked them to let Wallace speak, followed by chats of "Let him speak." But, while Civil Rights brought out some moral imperatives, I can't equate it with the abortion issue for Catholics.
 
Last edited:

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
No apologies necessary. Part of the dialogue.

I assume you did not know that George Wallace was invited and spoke at ND? Here's one student's recollection:

Well, f*ck. That torpedoes my best historical analogy.

For the record, I think he was mistaken there, but it's a prudential issue, and I can see where he was coming from. When Notre Dame bestows an award upon someone, or (to a lesser extent) invites them to speak on campus, it dignifies their views somewhat. Depending on what those views are, that can have dangerous consequences.

I'm not in favor of censorship. ND ought to send its best and brightest to contest these worldviews respectfully. But in the interest of moral clarity, some debates are better held at a neutral location.
 

Legacy

New member
Messages
7,871
Reaction score
321
Well, f*ck. That torpedoes my best historical analogy.

For the record, I think he was mistaken there, but it's a prudential issue, and I can see where he was coming from. When Notre Dame bestows an award upon someone, or (to a lesser extent) invites them to speak on campus, it dignifies their views somewhat. Depending on what those views are, that can have dangerous consequences.

I'm not in favor of censorship. ND ought to send its best and brightest to contest these worldviews respectfully. But in the interest of moral clarity, some debates are better held at a neutral location.

Laetare Medal Recipients have also included William Brennan (1964), Tip O'Neill (1980), Eunice Kennedy Shriver (1988), Daniel Patrick Moynihan (1992). Those Catholics - as well as Notre Dame's award to them - were also criticized for their stances/decisions regarding abortion (link to Moynihan's) as were Mario Cuomo and Ted Kennedy.
 
Last edited:

NDVirginia19

Rally
Messages
4,426
Reaction score
5,133
FWIW I believe the Gender Studies department got in deep shit for sponsoring her speech and had to take down all of their promotions on their website
 

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
Here's an article just published by the Cardinal Newman Society titled "Wendy Davis Hypes Abortion at Notre Dame on Feast of the Annunciation":

Catholics celebrated the Feast of the Annunciation on Monday, when the Virgin Mary said “yes” to God and Christ was conceived in her womb through the power of the Holy Spirit. But at the University of Notre Dame, a number of students spent Monday night on campus listening to former Texas State Senator Wendy Davis describe the benefits for women of choosing abortion or using contraception.

During Mass on Monday, Pope Francis encouraged the faithful to open their hearts to God and to say “yes” to his message of salvation. “Mary’s ‘yes’ opens the door to Jesus’ ‘yes’: I have come to do Your will, this is the ‘yes’ that Jesus carries with him throughout his life, until the cross” he said. “Today,” he said, “is a beautiful day in which to thank God for showing us that path, but also for thinking about our lives.” The Feast was transferred to April 4 because it would have fallen on Good Friday.

Davis’ message ultimately taught students at the nation’s most recognizable Catholic university that saying “no” to God’s plan for the creation of life and to the Church’s teachings on human dignity can help women achieve worldly success.

Davis — who rose to stardom in the political world following her 2013 filibuster of pro-life legislation in Texas — ran the gamut of pro-abortion, anti-Catholic talking points during an event Monday hosted by the University of Notre Dame Department of Gender Studies. The department co-sponsored the event in coordination with the College Democrats of Notre Dame, the Progressive Student Alliance, Notre Dames, Women in Politics and bridgeND.

The Notre Dame Department of Gender Studies touted Davis’ abortion advocacy in a description of the event posted on the department’s website, calling her “a modern-day Texas heroine”:

Former Texas State Senator Wendy Davis is widely recognized as a passionate advocate for women’s healthcare and other national issues which threaten our individual freedoms. Sen. Davis prides herself on the ability to see an issue from multiple perspectives, while forging a path to consensus and compromise. She skyrocketed to near celebrity status after her historic 13 hour filibuster in the Texas Senate to stop a legislative effort that would have dramatically reduced women’s access to healthcare services in her state.

Wendy Davis, a modern-day Texas heroine, appeared on the national scene as a State Senator during her 2013 filibuster that temporarily blocked devastating legislation seeking to limit women’s access to abortions and reproductive healthcare in the state of Texas. Before that, Davis fought tirelessly in the Texas legislature to further equality for women through education, fair lending, and equal pay initiatives. A single mother from humble beginnings who worked her way to Harvard Law, Davis shares her inspiring story of overcoming adversity, fear, and self-doubt to reach these incredible heights and underscores the importance of how every woman’s story can make a difference.
The event description was removed from the department’s website Monday afternoon, but a cached version is available here, and The Cardinal Newman Society captured an image of the webpage. The College Democrats of Notre Dame used a similar description for their Facebook event promoting Davis’ talk.

A question and answer segment was moderated by Notre Dame Professor Candida Moss, who has “built herself a reputation for making outrageous statements about the Church,” as noted in the Newman Society’s previous reporting.

During her talk, titled, “Rising Up: From Single Mother to Harvard Law, How Every Woman Stands to Make a Difference,” Davis referred to abortion as a necessity for the advancement of women, praised Planned Parenthood and said the U.S. Supreme Court decided when human life begins.

Davis told the gathering of students it would be wrong forthem to “impose” their ideas about abortion on others. “The issue of [abortion] is not to impose our ideas on other people — particularly when we may not understand the position a person is in, and the decision she is making,” she said, according to the Notre Dame student newspaper The Observer.

Her position is similar to the one held by Vice President Joe Biden, whom Notre Dame is awarding its Laetare Medal — the “oldest and most prestigious honor accorded to American Catholics” — despite his support for abortion. Bishop Kevin Rhoades of Fort Wayne – South Bend, Ind., provided an excellent response to this scandal on March 14, but so far, The Observer has yet publish any reports online exploring the bishop’s statement.

In a personal moment, Davis told students she aborted her more than 20-week-old daughter “out of love.”

“[I was] post-20 weeks of pregnancy of a much-wanted pregnancy that I had waited years to have, and … our very much-wanted child was suffering from a fatal fetal brain abnormality,” she said. “What we were told was that if our child survived delivery, which she would likely not, that she would live a life of tremendous suffering — if she lived long at all — and we made a decision out of love.”

The legislation Davis filibustered in Texas was intended to ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, when children can feel pain. Davis told students her abortion was the reason she started the filibuster.

The Church teaches that all human life, including unborn children with disabilities, “must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception,” and that abortion is never permissible. The Catholic pro-life group Human Life International (HLI) describes the abortion of children specifically because of their disabilities as “nothing more than eugenics, discrimination of the basest kind.”

“Those who abort a preborn child with genetic abnormalities are saying by their actions that a baby with disabilities has less of a right to live than a baby without such disabilities,” according to HLI. “A truly humane society would not kill its weakest members, but would rather love them and support them, even if their disabilities are incompatible with life.”

“Even if a baby will die shortly after she is born, what is a more civilized response — to hold and love her in the short time she has on this earth, or cut her apart with a vacuum curettage machine?” the pro-life group continued. “It is easy to love the perfect; but how much we are willing to give to the imperfect is the true measure of love.”

Turning to issues of education and jobs, Davis told students that the “connection between reproductive autonomy and economic opportunity in this country” is “very important.”

Praising Planned Parenthood, Davis said the various services provided by nation’s largest abortion provider “allowed her to climb the ranks her mother and grandmother could not.”

“Without my access to [Planned Parenthood], it was very likely I would have found myself with a second unplanned pregnancy,” Davis said, according to a tweet from an editor of The Observer.

She also linked her views on abortion and “reproductive autonomy” to an embrace of feminism, an argument pro-life feminists absolutely reject.

Taking questions from the crowd, Davis was asked, “At what point do you believe life begins and at what point do you think it should be protected?”

“I think the Supreme Court has had made that decision for us,” she responded. Davis reportedly responded to another question saying, “Let’s remember that abortion is a protected right in this country.” Davis’ answers were clearly not in line with Church teaching, but there is no indication from reports on her comments that Catholic teaching was ever discussed during the event.

Laws legitimizing abortion are considered immoral and should be opposed, according to the Church. Saint John Paul II wrote in Evangelium Vitae: “To claim the right to abortion, infanticide and euthanasia, and to recognize that right in law, means to attribute to human freedom a perverse and evil significance: that of an absolute power over others and against others. This is the death of true freedom.”

A few minutes later The Observer editor tweeted that Davis received a standing ovation at the conclusion of the event.

Responding to the event announcement, the Notre Dame alumni group Sycamore Trust stated in an email on Sunday: “A supporter also of same-sex marriage, Ms. Davis is a state version of Vice President Biden. There could scarcely be a more obvious contravention of the bishops’ declaration that ‘Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles’ and that they ‘should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.’”

Considering Notre Dame’s honor of Biden with the Laetare Medal, Sycamore Trust Chairman William Dempsey said, “t is unsurprising that faculty units and student clubs don’t hesitate to put forward Ms. Davis as a model for modern women, a ‘Texas heroine,’ for championing ‘reproductive rights.’ … Those in governance who should check this sort of misadventure are themselves causing scandal of the same sort.”

But Dempsey added, “[L]et us not forget that Notre Dame is home to many faculty, students and organizations dedicated to the school’s Catholic mission. They are really the front line victims of these blows at the school’s Catholic reputation, and they deserve the prayerful support of all who love Notre Dame.”
 
Top