The Faculty Senate of Notre Dame inexplicably and horrifyingly voted down a resolution of support for either Father Jenkins’s participation in the March for Life or the recommendations of his Task Force on Supporting the Choice for Life, according to published reports.
They couldn’t even support the choice for life? Mind you, this was not a controversial or radically pro-life statement sent to the Faculty Senate for their up and down vote.
The Irish Rover reports:
The proposed resolution states, “The Faculty Senate affirms again Fr. Jenkins’ witness to the University of Notre Dame’s commitments both to intellectual inquiry and debate and to the dignity of the human person and the sanctity of human life; and by this resolution wishes to commend the ongoing public witness of Fr. Jenkins, his Task Force on Supporting the Choice for Life, the Coordinator of University Life Issues, and most especially Notre Dame students, to a culture of life.”
The resolution also asserts that it respects the “freedom of conscience of individual University faculty (and Faculty Senate) members who may disagree in whole or in part” with the Task Force. In addition to encouraging the university to implement the suggestions of the Task Force, the resolution “urges both the Coordinator for University Life Issues and the University administration itself to strive in all their programs and policies to be faithful to the full spectrum of Catholic Social Teaching.”
This tepid statement that even said it respected “freedom of conscience” was trounced 22-8 by faculty representatives so wedded to the destruction of life that they can’t stand considering the alternative of life.
Mind you, the Faculty Senate endorsed Obama being honored at Notre Dame.
Father Wilson Miscamble, C.S.C., the President of the Notre Dame Chapter of Faculty for Life, was quoted as saying:
The vote is a serious disappointment and hopefully does not reflect the views of the faculty as a whole. That the faculty senate failed to approve a modest resolution affirming Fr. John Jenkins’s witness to the sanctity of life is very sad indeed and reflects poorly on the faculty senate.
I think it reflects poorly on the entire school, doesn’t it?
While there are many wonderful things which occur at Notre Dame, how long can we say that it’s only the President or it’s only the Faculty Senate or it’s only this or that.
Project Sycamore suggests:
The radical shrinking of a Catholic faculty presence has obvious consequences for life issues, since non-practicing Catholics are far more likely to be pro-choice than the general population while practicing Catholics are far more likely to be pro-life.
Is it any wonder, then, that, as we have reported, a recent survey showed that the proportion of pro-choice students increases sharply while they are at Notre Dame to the point that there is no difference between Notre Dame graduates and the general population?
This is just one more worrisome turn at America’s most well known Catholic University. Let’s hope things turn around. But hope dwindles.
May 3, 2011 at 4:25 pm
Duck, please share your blog. thank you.
May 3, 2011 at 4:39 pm
if i may Duck, with regard to choosing evil over suffering, i presume Sue means that many choose the intrinsic evil of killing an innocent human being over the unwanted suffering of carrying the child to term and either choosing to raise the child herself or give the child up for adoption.
also, scientifically speaking, if human life does not begin at conception, then what is the 'product' of conception ? it can only be a human being. or does science not yet have an answer to that?
May 3, 2011 at 6:05 pm
"Mr Liberal said…
Dear mr/mrs whatever season, ur have no standing in this. U have not "debated" anything. You have tried miserably to turn a debate into a fight."
Really? How so? I mean, I provided a link to the Task Force page and asked a series of questions that were never answered. In response, I received a lot of goalpost moving and litany of imagined horrors. Still, you seem to think otherwise, so please point it out. I try to learn from my mistakes.
May 3, 2011 at 6:10 pm
And what do you mean by "no standing"? You can't mean it in the legal sense, so I'm at a loss.
Which brings up my main objection: if you're going to blanket vague assertions or claims and refuse to back it up with anything other than your ipse dixit, don't be surprised when you're called on it.
May 3, 2011 at 6:15 pm
http://www.facebook.com/HighOnQuack
http://www.highonquack.blogspot.com
May 3, 2011 at 6:31 pm
This comment has been removed by the author.
May 3, 2011 at 6:33 pm
Dear Self Season, By no standing I plainly meant what I said. You have not debated anything, thus you have no standing. Anything you have to say is a moot point due to the fact that instead of having a discussion or debate about the topic at hand (about which I agree with Duck), you have tried to turn it into a fight. If you wish, I will be glad to point it out to you.
Dear Anonymous, Life does not start at conception. If that were the case any woman who has unprotected sex followed by a period more than once in her life would be considered a mass murderer. You pro-lifers, or the majority I've spoken with at least, cannot prove that a fertilized egg is indeed a human being. You claim God says life is sacred, but we both know thats a load of dung. People said life is sacred, not God. If you look at history God is the leading cause of death. Have a nice day. (Yes, that was George Carlin paraphrased. I learned early on in life that someone else has already said it better.)
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Mr-Liberal/120880887992309
May 3, 2011 at 8:19 pm
By no standing I plainly meant what I said. You have not debated anything, thus you have no standing. Anything you have to say is a moot point due to the fact that instead of having a discussion or debate about the topic at hand (about which I agree with Duck), you have tried to turn it into a fight. If you wish, I will be glad to point it out to you.
Yes, yes, yes–you've established your perception of things. And that you're quite comfortable throwing around airy generalities, sweeping judgments and the like. Unfortunately, I asked you for specifics. It's wonderful that you like Duck and all, and apparently share a common aversion to questions.
But I asked for specifics, so yes–any specifics this time? You know, pointing to anything I said? We've already established that you think are a much, much better person than I. Let's bracket that for a moment and get to the point.
May 3, 2011 at 8:26 pm
Dear Anonymous, Life does not start at conception
Provide a scientific basis for your argument.
If that were the case any woman who has unprotected sex followed by a period more than once in her life would be considered a mass murderer.
You'd have flunked out of every Criminal Law 101 course in the country with that one. That's such a compound of legal and logical incoherence that it's not even wrong. I hope to Perry Mason you're not a prosecutor. It has neither the mens rea nor the actus reus to be murder. I mean, for pete's sake.
It's like they say about the internet: spend too much time on it and your palm will end up grafted to your face.
May 3, 2011 at 8:41 pm
Geez, even the biology for the "period is murder" argument is atrocious. I thought it was reasonably common knowledge that unprotected sex doesn't always end in pregnancy, but public schools are not what they used to be. Unless "Mr. Liberal" thinks pro-lifers believe the egg alone is human life.
Either way: Motrin.
May 3, 2011 at 9:19 pm
Looking over their respective blogs, I can see that Mr. Liberal and Duck are each other's only readers. Based on the grasp of logic and grammar on display here, it's not difficult to see why.
May 3, 2011 at 11:33 pm
Conception: the process of becoming pregnant involving fertilization or implantation or both.
Fertilization: an act or process of fecundation, insemination, or pollination —not used technically (2) : the process of union of two gametes whereby the somatic chromosome number is restored and the development of a new individual is initiated
Allow me to dumb it down for you folks; seeing as how you evidently cannot comprehend logic.
According to you pro-life/anti-woman people life begins at conception/fertilization( both are defined above). So if a woman, that's a human without a penis between its legs, has unprotected sex (that's when a mans penis is inserted into a womans vagina repeatedly until the man has an orgasm) and one of her eggs becomes fertilized because of that act, but does not attach to the side of her uterus(thats the part of a womans body where a baby grows before being born) and is flushed out of her body during menstruation(also called a period) that would be called natural abortion.
Now according to you pro-life/anti-woman people abortion is murder.
So, if a woman has a period after having sex that results in a fertilized egg, because life starts at conception/fertilization according to your propaganda, that would classify the woman as a murderer. And if this happens more than once, again according to you people, that would make her a mass-murderer/serial killer.
Now, unless any of you pro-life/anti-woman people want to contradict the signs you like to hold and the bile you like to spew outside of Planned Parenthood and other womens clinics, what I have said before and just repeated is correct, based upon your so-called facts.
Now, I know it's going to be hard to admit that you are a group of very unintelligent, narrow minded people. But, given that I have just used your own propaganda to prove this point, you are going to have to come to terms with it.
Have a nice day.
May 3, 2011 at 11:50 pm
We are not each other's "only" readers. The simple fact that you said that means you can't count. We both have very new public blogs. Mine is two months old, his newer. Based off our page hits, we are not the only page viewers of each other's blogs.
May 4, 2011 at 1:36 am
I don't say this often, Mr. Liberal–but you are a consummate idiot. One of the greats.
First, his name is S.M. Stirling, not "Sterling." Get that right on your profile. A man who can't master basic spelling is not in a position to trumpet his presumed intelligence over the rest of us.
Second, you willfully ignorant jackass, "murder" is the deliberate extermination of human life with malice aforethought. Try looking it up in a dictionary. Oh, nevermind–I'll do it for you since you are remarkably slow and probably sweat profusely over your Chef Boyardee:
"The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice."
Have a much smarter friend read the definition to you a few times until it sinks in. Either that, or work really hard to get that GED.
While it is indeed unfortunate that your logical training underwent a partial birth abortion, Mr. Mensa, the fact of the matter is this: a woman who loses a fertilized egg through natural process hasn't deliberately ended anything by any form of premeditation.
It's not that hard. Unless you're you. And even then, patting yourself on the back with one of your pasty hands because you emote otherwise doesn't change it.
Study harder, champ, and don't bring that weak crap back here again.
May 4, 2011 at 2:12 am
Dear Dale,
First I would like to thank you for pointing out my typos. I don't normally prof read much, so a few tend to get through.
Here you go stooping to mere thuggery instead of attempting to actually respond. Sure, pick apart my typos. If it makes you feel like a real man, feel free. You give nothing more than a typical childish response when presented with the flaws of your argument.
Have a nice day Dale. Let me know if you find anymore typos.
Hmmm, I appear to have been blocked. Looks like I get to be Anonymous from now on.
May 4, 2011 at 3:01 am
Hmmm, I appear to have been blocked.
Genius, if you were blocked you wouldn't be able to post this.
And you made absolutely no points in your screed, so I'm not sure what Dale was supposed to respond to. Your entire comment was an emotionalistic ad hominem-laced (you pro-life/anti-woman people), un-scientific rant that was among the stupidest things ever written on the internet. If anyone is being childish it's the lazy, anonymous troll whose understanding of human biology, logic, and morality is about on par with my two-year old child's.
May 4, 2011 at 3:27 am
Paul, I always refer to you pro-life/anti-women people as pro-life/anti-women people.
As for being banned there was a glitch on my end that would not allow me to connect to my profile, I unknowingly mis-spoke in that regard.
How is any of what I wrote unscientific? Oh, you must mean the propaganda I got from one of the pro-life sites I looked at while writing that response. Here's the site I used when making my argument:
http://lettersfromthewomb.com/top-10-pro-life-quotes/
Other than that, what I wrote is actual fact. You pro-life/anti-woman people say life begins at conception/fertilization. Well many fertilized eggs naturally don't become babies. And according to you pro-life/anti-women people abortion is murder. So by those logics, if a womans body naturally flushes the fertilized egg out of her body that would be considered murder. I'm sorry that your own "facts" prove this point. Perhaps you pro-life/anti-women people should research before you start waving signs out in front of womens clinics and telling women that have been raped/molested that they're murdering a child.
Have a nice night Paul.
May 4, 2011 at 3:36 am
ML
Clearly, these antis don't understand Sentential Logic. That's why they can't understand our arguments.
May 4, 2011 at 1:30 pm
"Here you go stooping to mere thuggery instead of attempting to actually respond."
I just figured out who you remind me of: White Goodman, the character played by Ben Stiller in "Dodge Ball." He had a habit of using terms he didn't understand, trying to bully others with faux intellectual insights and losing.
"Thuggery" is an ironic charge from a twerp who larded his gasbaggery with multiple insults about the non-intelligence of his opponents. Like Duck, you seem to have a knack for passive aggression in the face of real opposition. Along with freezing like deer in a spotlight when face with inconvenient facts.
I understand, Brave Sir Robin, what lies behind your repeated, ironic puling about "thuggery"–you bit off way more than you could chew. When challenged, you invariably tuck tail and run.
When danger rear its ugly head/he bravely turned away and fled…
Enjoy that bowl of Beefaroni. And crack a dictionary once in a while, too. Look up "murder" sometime. In between your private reflection periods, of course.
"Clearly, these antis don't understand Sentential Logic. That's why they can't understand our arguments."
Awww–how cute. A mutual admiration society.
P.S.–From reading your responses, Duck, your arguments will be more effective when guided by something other than your spleen.
May 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm
Dale, when reading Mr. Liberal and Duck's "thoughts," I was actually thinking more along the lines of Billy Madison.
Mr. [Liberal], what you've just said … is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.