Comments on: The Latest on the Mexico City Policy

By: Obama overturns the Mexico City Policy

Obama overturns the Mexico City Policy — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:20:12 +0000

[...] The same news being echoed by FoxNews.com and LifeSiteNews.com. (Yours truly jumped the gun in reporting this news as well, thus meriting the harsh censure of a blogger at Vox Nova impassioned by a concern for journalistic a…). [...]

By: Zippy

Zippy — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 05:51:55 +0000

I think this post, along with MM’s latest, is an unintentionally hilarious commentary on Vox Nova.

By: Franklin Jennings

Franklin Jennings — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 03:30:16 +0000

“Like much of the <> Catholic media, they’re little more than sensationalist gossip rags.”

Hear! Hear! Especially any Catholic media that actually puts “new” in its name, even in Latin. Trash all around.

By: TeutonicTim

TeutonicTim — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 23:51:43 +0000

with YOUR money paying for it.

By: TeutonicTim

TeutonicTim — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 23:50:13 +0000

What a surprise. A post at VN that derides news outlets for reporting his intentions because he didn’t quite do it yet.

Within 24 hours, here we have it. I won’t hold my breath for the posts by contributors criticizing this executive order.

Need I remind you that ONLY Obama could have implemented this policy. No matter if his advisors, his congress, his wife, his “pastor”, his God had any input, this was HIS decision.

MM – remember when you said that the President didn’t have any power to affect abortion? Tell that to the children eliminated in the third world.

By: Michael Denton

Michael Denton — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 23:05:01 +0000

NYT posted at 5:10 Est that he did sign

By: c matt

c matt — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 22:32:24 +0000

As to the actual topic of this post, I’d have to say that Poli kind of jumped the gun on LifeSite’s gun jumping. A day later is not so far off from “immediately” or “wasting no time.” Hard to put a positive light on this “postponement” now that it was “postponed” a whole 24 hours.

By: c matt

c matt — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 22:24:58 +0000

I don’t know what you mean by succeed – on some of his proposed policies, I really do hope he succeeds (eliminating torture, keeping us out of wars, getting the economy back on track); on others, I hope he fails miserably (FOCA and other pro-abortion policies). But then, I’ve felt the same about most administrations D or R.

By: c matt

c matt — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 22:19:37 +0000

In my heart of hearts, I really wanted O not to reverse the MCP. Alas, he did. I honestly did not expect him to go back on his word to reverse the MCP, but that makes me sad and dissappointed, not glad. But then, what we told his Catholic supporters was that O was a man of his word wrt his abortion stand. How is that distorting things, especially since he has kept his word on MCP?

By: JohnMcG

JohnMcG — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 22:18:47 +0000

David,

If you address your posts to what you suspect are people’s hidden motives rather than what they actually say are their motives, then dialogue and debate are impossible.

You are probably right that the set of Vox Nova readers includes some who would not be pleased to see President Obama be successful. And there are probably also some readers who think abortion isn’t that big a deal.

But if we address our missives at those hidden motives, all that emerges is an “is too,” “is not” type of dialogue that doesn’t get us anywhere closer to the truth.

I think both c matt and I have articulated why a pro-life person may be pleased if Obama’s policies result in a reduction in abortions, but nevertheless unsatisfied.

I also think it would be difficult for either side to claim vindication on this issue because the abortion rate is subject to influence from a variety of factors, and we can’t construct an alternative reality where more restrictive policies are enacted and compare.

By: David Nickol

David Nickol — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 22:09:13 +0000

Perhaps you could wait until someone here actually articulates the positions you are ciriticizing before criticing them.

JohnMcG,

I think there are probably people who post on Vox Nova who, in their heart of hearts, want Obama to do appalling things regarding abortion for the next four years so they can keep pointing out how very right they were to oppose him and how wrong his Catholic supporters were to vote for him. However, don’t expect them to admit (even to themselves) that they are secretly glad. And if Obama doesn’t do appalling things (which, in my opinion, he won’t), these people will miss no opportunity to claim that whatever he does is appalling.

The desire to be “proven” right is a very powerful one, and of course not just on the subject of Obama and abortion. It is part of human nature to unwittingly and sometimes deliberately distort things so that we can always see ourselves in a positive light. Maybe we should admire Rush Limbaugh’s honesty in saying he hopes Obama fails.

By: c matt

c matt — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 22:02:05 +0000

Well, not exactly disagreed, but it is the first task of law to make sure life is protected. So, I would not particularly agree with the last part: that there will always be a concrete, honorable and possible alternative to abortion.

Abortion shouldn’t be an alternative.

I don’t disagree at all with efforts to reduce the resort to abortion. But I also do not agree with keeping the resort to abortion. It seems too many are stuck in an either/or rather than both/and mode.