Pro-life shout outs at Sotomayor hearing: good or bad?
Altogether, 5 protesters – all pro-life – have disrupted Sonia Sotomayor’s Supreme Court confirmation hearings, 4 yesterday and 1 today. On page 2 were yesterday’s. Two came during Franken’s statement (last clip), 1 of those being Norma McCorvey, aka Roe in Roe v. Wade…
Some here have complained about the disruptions. I happen to think they’re fine, good even. Here’s Gregg Cunningham’s take, president of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform:
Yesterday, at least 3 protesters disrupted the Sotomayor confirmation hearings by shouting out references to the invisible elephant in the hearing room: Abortion.
I say bravo! It is important that we remind the American people that Judge Sotomayor is a baby-killer. Bellowing that fact is consistent with the tactics of the abolitionists who would follow bounty hunters (chasing fugitive slaves) into restaurants and loudly announce the presence of these slave catchers, urging the owners and patrons of the restaurant to have nothing to do with them.
I supported this disruptive tactic during Mr. Obama’s delivery of the commencement address at Notre Dame and I support it at the Sotomayor hearings. It is civil disobedience of the most commendable sort. Someone has to say it and if we wait for Lindsey Graham, Ms. Sotomayor may be allowed to get away with finessing the abortion elephant. We can’t stop her but we can make certain that she and her fellow travelers feel the sting of public censure.
And here is what Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life, wrote on AUL’s blog yesterday:
This morning’s start to the Sotomayor hearings featured multiple references to the life issue, underscoring what we expected – that life would be a hot-button issue with this nominee.
The above-the-fold “news” on life coming out of the morning, however, was the interruption of the proceedings twice from pro-life protesters. While I think it’s important to observe the decorum of a formal hearing and give due respect to the Senate, the protesters’ passion does underscore what we have been saying in our meetings with senators: The grassroots are paying attention to these hearings. They want to see careful, rigorous questioning of this nominee. Most importantly, as I told Politico, we are all “looking for heroes” – people who are willing to stand on principle, uncowed by challenging political circumstances.
[Top photo attribution: AP; middle photo attribution: CBS News; bottom photo attribution: The Guardian]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
It doesn’t matter. 70% of the country still believes that Roe should not be overturned. If a few anti-choicers want to make asses of themselves on national TV, so be it, but it’s not like they’re making a difference or anything.
Reality, 69% of the counry has no idea what Roe and Doe say, or what they established, and the vast majority of Americans DO want more restrictive laws on abortion.
But popularity contests aside, I agree with Jill that this sort of non-violent civil disobedience is well justified by the situation, and well founded in historical precedents. And I rather suspect that if you proaborts really thought it was going to hurt our cause, they would be urging us on and cheering from the sidelines.
Like the civil rights movement, our movement will
have to take their lumps to make any progress.
Al Franken has watched Senate Confirmations on TV and this qualifies him, in his own eyes, to be a Senator?
Mr. Franken: I think you spent a little too much time in front of your bathroom mirror telling yourself, “I love myself”, just a bit too much and goodness knows what else you did in front of that mirror.
What a clown!
Al Franken has watched Senate Confirmations on TV and this qualifies him, in his own eyes, to be a Senator?
Actually, he ran for Senate and was elected. Which, as you may know if you’re familiar with our system of representation, qualifies him to be a Senator.
Penny, the clown was “elected” by obviously fradulent votes.
Unless, of course, you believe it’s possible for there to be more voters than registrants. In that case, I guess everything was as clean as a surgery theater.
Interesting, people make claims but no basis to back them up; of course, most people are opinionated based on assumptions rather than informed. “More Americans “Pro-Life” Than “Pro-Choice” for First Time” http://www.gallup.com/poll/118399/More-Americans-Pro-Life-Than-Pro-Choice-First-Time.aspx
I am a Conservative and support the concept of “right to LIFE…” Life begins at conception, but this seems to only be accepted in the mainstream when it comes to prosecuting someone who has murdered a mother and unborn child…
The outburst are annoying, disrespectful, and discredit the Pro-Life movement and the Conservative cause.
They kept on re-counting the votes until Stuart Smalley won.
I have a vague recollection of feministas from the House of Representatives and Senate pounding the doors where the Senate Judiciary committee was holding meetings on a Supreme Court nominee demanding that the Committee address their concerns about the nominee’s fitness to serve on the United States Supreme Court.
So what’s the problem now, boys and girls?
yor bro ken
The clown got sworn in. Soo much decorum left with that.Pervert Bawney Fwank is in charge of fannie. Republicans are long over due garnering a little unusual attention.
Re: “It doesn’t matter. 70% of the country still believes that Roe should not be overturned.”
This doesn’t have any bearing on whether something is true or not. At the turn of the century the bulk of the medical establishment believed that in dysgenic propaganda, the idea that undesirables passed on their pathetic traits, both cultural and non-cultural to their offspring.
And why doesn’t anyone grill her on the fact that Roe was established by disregarding super duper precedent in the first place?
— lifeblog.scrtl.com
If a few anti-choicers want to make asses of themselves on national TV, so be it, but it’s not like they’re making a difference or anything.
The ultimate insult, “anti-choicer.” Stings.
And it would seem that in the US, the “anti-choicers” are definitely gaining ground.
70% of the country still believes that Roe should not be overturned.
83% of all statistics are made up.
Louise, lol…
Pat Leahy should can stick that gavel where the sun don’t shine. I heard Pat Leahy is the “Nastiest Democrat”
“By consensus-a consensus of Hill Republicans-Pat Leahy is the meanest, most partisan, most ruthless Democrat in the Senate. Ask a Republican about Leahy, and he’ll shudder. Then he will say that, though Leahy can be nice and smiling on the surface, underneath he is-take your pick-“a left-wing brute,” “nasty,” “a pile of pure malice.”
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_13_53/ai_76167308/pg_3/?tag=content;col1
Doyle is right. Many Americans have NO clue that Roe allowed for abortion through ALL 9 MONTHS of pregnancy. And DOE allowed it for “health” reasons which were very vague. AND Btw, “DOE” didn’t even want an abortion, she wanted a DIVORCE and to get her children out of Foster Care. She was used by the ACLU lawyers.
Al Frankinstein makes the US Senate EXCATLY what it is a JOKE of a chamber!
What’s the difference between Al Franken and former President Bush ? Franken started out as a clown and became a politician.
Bush started out as a politician and turned into a clown.
And just because Sotomayor is pro-choice does not mean she is a “baby-killer”. That’s a disgusting and insulting label.
She’s not responsable for a single abortion, nor has she ever tried to force any woman to have one. Neither has Obama.
He’s not a “baby-killer” either.
The REAL baby-killers are governments which deny women the right to abortion, thereby causing so many women to die in botched,illegal abortions in which the baby dies too.
I find it frustrating that we are not really getting a perspective of Sotomayor’s real view on Roe v Wade. She skirts the issue and calls it settled law. It was based on BAD law. When the Supreme Court is wrong, it needs to be changed. If that were not true, slavery would still be legal.
My husband is Puerto-Rican and I find it abhorrent how the women of Puerto Rico were treated by the U.S. drug companies in the 50’s-60’s era. They were used in lab experiments with birth control studies and many were sterilized without their knowledge or consent. It was under the guise of helping this overpopulated island to do away with the unwanted breeding of babies. They told the women they were vaccinating them. Meanwhile, the men were drafted for military service in the World Wars and yet they still cannot vote in our elections, if they so choosed. Many Puerto-Rican people are unaware of the hormonal lab experiments and sterilization campaign.
I would love to ask Ms. Sotomayor her feeling on the exploitation of the Puerto Rican peoples. Was she okay with the sterilization campaign on her mothers native island? What about her affiliations with pro-abort organizations? She considers those ties as “health care” organizations?
Rosie Perez did a documentary on these issues. It really is enlightening.
Robert Berger said: “And just because Sotomayor is pro-choice does not mean she is a “baby-killer”. ”
Yes,it does, Robert. As painful as it is for me to tell you, and for you to hear it, everyone who supports the unrestricted availability of elective abortion shares in the guilt of every abortion that happens while they express such support.
Abortion does kill babies, and you are a baby killer. Live with it as best you can.
“The REAL baby-killers are governments which deny women the right to abortion, thereby causing so many women to die in botched,illegal abortions in which the baby dies too.”
Right. What about the legal abortions, in which the baby dies reguardless–and is, in fact, supposed to die? Supporting the illegalization of abortion does not support the death of women. As a woman, I’d have to be a complete moron to seek out an illegal abortion, and anyone who thinks women are like cattle, likely to be herded off a cliff, are sexist and disgusting to begin with. Everyone knows by now how deadly they are. Would you support the legalization of suicide because suicidals might not die in a more safe, legal process? And really, if we’re against abortion, how in the world does criminilizing it make us baby-killers?
Sometimes you people amase me.
*amaze
I say that any protest such as at the confirmation of Sotomayor are just fine. The left and Gays have worn down Amerians for years with similiar tactics. Conservatives and pro-lifers can no longer be merely polite, but must take off the velvet gloves and directly engage the amoralists. loking at Obama sitting across from the Pope and smiling with that sociopathic grin of his is disgusting. I have not heard it and/or read it in the media about Obama’s helath care plan covering abortions, as the Democrat Socialist party is not letting that info out until the bill gets passed. The Socialists use every deceptive method they can get away with to advance their ideaology. The Republicans better start slamming Obama instead of worrying about what people may think, or the next election will be a bigger farce than the last one was. Whay is in the drinking water in Minneapolis that A left wing comedian like Al Frankenstein can get elected. I guess Alfred E. Newman could het elect in Minnesota if he ran as a Socialist or Democrat. The public and activist group must be just as relentless against the abortion and other radical leftist agendas as they have been against conservative agendas. if Americans do not want this country to become the Sodom and Gommorah of the West then they better fight vigorously
against all forms of radicalism such as same sex
marriage and abortion. The best to everybody
and to people like Jill Stanek
Mr. Berger,
I see you found your way back to Jill’s.
You are a glutton for punishment.
Do you have a lot of tatoos and body piercings.
You seem to crave pain of all kinds.
The term ‘baby killer’ would not offend if it were not true. It would be just so much empty chatter. The fact you are offended and/or insulted is just another indicator that you cannot handle the truth about what it is you advocate: death and distruction, misery and dispair.
Keep listening for the ‘pop’.
yor bro ken
Well said, Ken.
And just because Sotomayor is pro-choice does not mean she is a “baby-killer”. That’s a disgusting and insulting label.
She’s not responsable for a single abortion, nor has she ever tried to force any woman to have one. Neither has Obama.
He’s not a “baby-killer” either.
The REAL baby-killers are governments which deny women the right to abortion, thereby causing so many women to die in botched,illegal abortions in which the baby dies too.
Posted by: Robert Berger at July 15, 2009 8:58 AM
How is it that you are privy to information about Sotomayor’s and Obama’s personal history?
The REAL baby-killer are the ABORTIONISTS who perform botched illegal abortions in which women and babies die. Women and babies are their victims. Your indignation towards pro-lifers is misdirected.
“I would love to ask Ms. Sotomayor her feeling on the exploitation of the Puerto Rican peoples. Was she okay with the sterilization campaign on her mothers native island? What about her affiliations with pro-abort organizations? She considers those ties as “health care” organizations?”
“Rosie Perez did a documentary on these issues. It really is enlightening.”
If you google “ask Sotomayor” you’ll find the top ten pro-life questions they would like senators to ask Sotomayor
You can vote for your top choice,