"Abortion Rights" Debate at Boston College on C-SPAN

[Prolife1968]

What a disgrace that a Catholic University would allow such a horrible event. There is no room for discussion on abortion.

Tim Russert was the moderator, and he repeatedly used the language of the abortionists–“abortion rights”

I’m for abortion rights–the rights of babies not to be violently killed in the womb.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Riley259]

There was a debate at BC hosted by Tim Russert that was about a more general topic (Catholics and politics) that touched upon abortion among other things. There were representatives on the panel from both sides: the faithful Catholics (ex., Peggy Noonan) and the very unfaithful ones (James Carville). My understanding is that Noonan and others defended the Church’s position on abortion quite well and Carville, well, he just came off looking like a buffoon. Are we talking about the same debate?

 

[chicago]

Riley259:

…and Carville, well, he just came off looking like a buffoon.

Isn’t that how he typically comes off?

 

[D_Quintero]

Does anyone have a link to that debate?

 

[mary_bobo]

I saw it, and it is freightening how Catholics can rationalize their pro-abortion opinions. And as far a Carville is concerned, watching him rant is like watching a side show. People like this give the Church a bad name.

 

[bones_IV]

Seems that many a Catholic uses the Harvard ‘evolutionary biologist’ dictionary as the source for their pro-abortion sharades. Fact: nobody (name removed by moderator)lants the baby, the baby implants himself. The baby is in charge every step of the way during the pregnancy.

 

[DreadVandal]

Riley259:

There was a debate at BC hosted by Tim Russert that was about a more general topic (Catholics and politics) that touched upon abortion among other things. There were representatives on the panel from both sides: the faithful Catholics (ex., Peggy Noonan) and the very unfaithful ones (James Carville). My understanding is that Noonan and others defended the Church’s position on abortion quite well and Carville, well, he just came off looking like a buffoon. Are we talking about the same debate?

Carville came off looking like a buffoon? Say it isn’t so!

 

[Orionthehunter]

While I didn’t see the debate, I’m not opposed to having organized debates on issues like this on Catholic campuses. In fact, I’m for a legitimate debate that allows a reputable and effective spokesperson like Peggy Noonan to represent our view can be an effective way to catechize and inform the uninformed/misinformed coeds on the campus. She speaks in language that all Catholic’s can embrace and her approach will expose the dissenting Catholic’s non-Catholic beliefs.

What I am opposed to is when Catholic colleges allow social/political groups whose sole purpose is to promote anti-Catholic dogmas (gay rights or abortion rights) to be recognized as formal groups on campus.

Regarding the OP’s opposition to the use of the word abortion rights: I like that phrase as it says clearly what they are for- aborting a baby as opposed to the euphemistic “pro-choice” as it denies the choice of 50% of the parties to the abortion. But I do get what the OP is getting at. We need to be frank in what the issues are as uncomfortable as they might make the people who want to avoid dealing with the horror.

 

[chicago]

Orionthehunter:

Regarding the OP’s opposition to the use of the word abortion rights: I like that phrase as it says clearly what they are for- aborting a baby as opposed to the euphemistic “pro-choice” as it denies the choice of 50% of the parties to the abortion. But I do get what the OP is getting at. We need to be frank in what the issues are as uncomfortable as they might make the people who want to avoid dealing with the horror.

I have to agree about my own preference for the term “abortion rights”. I once asked an elected representative of mine at a public meeting about something he voted on, noting that he supports “abortion rights”. I thought this the right term to use, not only because it is more accurately descriptive, but also because it appears to be the commonly accepted term for use these days even by those who are in support of such. He, however, quickly and insistently snapped repeatedly that he is “Pro-choice”. Interesting how nervouly uncomfortable he was with the more appropriate terminology.

 

[ElizabethAnne]

It is true that Carville came off like a buffoon to those of us who disagree with him, but there were many in the audience who enjoyed his comments. Many laughed and applauded while he openly mocked the Catholic faith. His comments garnered the most applause, and people gathered after the discussion to get his autograph.

I, on the other hand, was appauled by his comments (I guess it would have been good if I had done some research on Carville before I went). In my opinion, BC should never have invited him. It is one thing to start a debate about Catholic politicians and it is another to invite someone known to be rude and resort to mocking the Church rather than providing intelligent thoughts.

 

[DreadVandal]

ElizabethAnne:

It is true that Carville came off like a buffoon to those of us who disagree with him, but there were many in the audience who enjoyed his comments. Many laughed and applauded while he openly mocked the Catholic faith. His comments garnered the most applause, and people gathered after the discussion to get his autograph.

I, on the other hand, was appauled by his comments (I guess it would have been good if I had done some research on Carville before I went). In my opinion, BC should never have invited him. It is one thing to start a debate about Catholic politicians and it is another to invite someone known to be rude and resort to mocking the Church rather than providing intelligent thoughts.

Well, I had written off Boston College a long time ago. Personally, I don’t consider it to be a Catholic university. A jesuit university? Yes. A Catholic University? No. Let’s pray for the conversion of the Jesuit order to the Catholic faith.