It’s not very often that we post something related to pro-life issues, but Robert George’s summary of a pro-life event at Princeton caught my eye.

Ramesh wowed an audience of 300 at Princeton last night with a devastating critique of the lies, falsifications, and distortions contained in the famous Brief of 281 historians submitted in the case of Webster v. Reproductive Health Services in a successful effort in 1989 to persuade the Supreme Court not to reverse Roe v. Wade. The Roe opinion itself, written by Harry Blackmun, relied heavily on an account of the legal history of abortion which turned out to be profoundly flawed. The “pro-choice” historians–including some of the most distinguished people in the field–stepped in to shore it up when Roe when it appeared to be about to fall.

George is no hack, nor is Ponneru, but these are strong claims. But wait, there’s more!

Also appearing on the evening’s program was Dr. Bernard Nathanson, the abortionist and co-founder of NARAL, who gave a chilling account of the lies he and his colleagues told in their effort to legalize abortion in the late 1960s and early 70s. He told the audience about disseminating false polling data, falsifying statistics about illegal abortions and maternal death rates, and engaging in many other appalling acts of dishonesty. “We believed our lies were justified in what we regarded as a good cause,” he confessed.

Wow. That’s strong stuff. Good thing the Princeton Pro-Life group that hosted the event now has streaming video of the panel on their website. I haven’t watched it yet to confirm George’s account, but I’m planning on it.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Posted by Matthew Lee Anderson

Matthew Lee Anderson is the Founder and Lead Writer of Mere Orthodoxy. He is the author of Earthen Vessels: Why Our Bodies Matter to our Faith and The End of Our Exploring: A Book about Questioning and the Confidence of Faith. Follow him on Twitter or on Facebook.

3 Comments

  1. You mean that the interests of America and the interests of fellow brothers & sisters in Christ might conflict?

    …and let’s not forget Israel-Palestine, which is a sticky wicket without the presence of Palestinian Christians, but gets much harder when you actually consider their plight .

    Reply

    1. The problem is with all the John Hagees and John MacArthurs in this country, who don’t even recognize Catholics and Orthodox (and most Middle Eastern Christians are one of these) as legitimate brothers and sisters in Christ at all. The influence of Protestant fundy-ism (which sees anyone who isn’t a Protestant fundy as being not a “real Christian”) on American foreign policy is shocking and dismaying; it notably skews American approaches toward Russia/Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Israel, etc.

      And speaking of Israel, why do Christian Zionists side with Rabbinic Judaism while ignoring (or even denigrating) the Palestinian Christians? People like Hagee claim that Christians and Jews “worship the same God”; but is this even really true when Rabbinic Judaism has denied both the Trinity and the divinity of Christ ever since the Council of Jamnia in A. D. 70? Fundies are constantly pointing out the specks in the eyes of Catholicism and Orthodoxy, while ignoring both the planks in their own eyes and the boulders in the eyes of the Rabbis. Of course, Islam is an enemy of the Gospel too, but in a Christian context “the enemy of my enemy” is NOT necessarily my friend. Just because Sabellius was a heretic, and Arius opposed Sabellianism, doesn’t mean we must by default become Arian.

      Reply

      1. Likewise, we shouldn’t give Israel carte blanche on everything just because the Israelis are against radical Islam and so are we.

        Reply

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.