“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” – Samuel Adams

Elena Kagan Abortion Advocacy Revealed

Liberals in the Obama Administration and the “mainstream” media tried to placate us with reports of the faux support of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan for the partial birth abortion ban in 1997, but as you might expect, the claim doesn’t really hold water.

LifeNews brings more evidence to contradict this assertion in a story about an article Kagan wrote for the Daily Princetonian a week after Ronald Reagan was elected president in 1980:

Reagan won a landslide victory over President Jimmy Carter and Kagan’s essay lamented that victory and had her hoping for a “more leftist left” in the 1984 elections.

“Even after the returns came in, I found it hard to conceive of the victories of these anonymous but Moral Majority-backed opponents” of certain pro-abortion candidates, Kagan wrote.

She called them “avengers of ‘innocent life’” who were “beneficiaries of a general turn to the right and a profound disorganization on the left.”

Douglas Johnson, the legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee noticed the comment and the scare quotes around the phrase “innocent life” — clearly inferring that pro-life advocates have a misread on the moral status of unborn children.

The Roe v. Wade decision which legalized abortion in the United States in 1973 was itself an act of raw judicial activism, based on nebulous overreach to the “penumbras” of “emanations” from actual rights. In case you don’t know what a penumbra is, it is the shadowy twilight of obscurity. So the “right” to kill your child comes from shadowy emanations rather than something solid and distinct.  Basing the question of life or death on something as insubstantial as a shadow is weak–very weak.  Would you want your life or death determined by shadows, or something more definitive?

Of course, this 37 year old decision was made before all that modern science has revealed about the life in the womb–including a beating heart and the ability to feel pain at just a few weeks development.

Even the chief activist and architect of the “right” to kill your own child, Justice Harry Blackmun, admitted in the Roe decision that if the personhood of the child in the womb could be established, the “right” to abortion “of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment.”

Unless she is willing to admit that she may have been mistaken, modern science and medicine may be on the verge of proving she has been on the wrong side of the most basic of all human rights: the right to life.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t think a person is fit to serve as a judge at any level if they are on the wrong side of an innocent person’s right to live.


Try us out at the new location: American Clarion!


4 Responses to “Elena Kagan Abortion Advocacy Revealed”

  1. I keep reading on previous comments here is that Kagan is a homosexual activist. Does anyone know or have knowledge that she is gay and if not , why say it ?

  2. Whether she is a homosexual or not is the subject of considerable speculation–and she doesn't seem inclined to settle the question.

    She has definitely been an activist for the homosexual agenda. She wants homosexuals to be allowed to serve openly in the military, supported barring ROTC and military recruiters on campus as a reaction to the prohibition on homosexual behavior in the military, a number of people believe she is homosexual, and I have heard that she is or has dated Chastity Bono (aka Chaz Bono), a woman who has had her sexual features mutilated to make her look like a man. The last two items are difficult to verify, as she isn't saying much and the “mainstream” media is engaging in its usual objective watchdog behavior and not looking into these matters at all.

    It would be nice to know, one way or the other, simply so that it's out in the open and no longer a mystery. Generally, my rule of thumb is that if someone avoids answering an obvious question (or if their friends help avoid the question), the odds are that the suspicion is probably true.

    Whether she is in fact a homosexual or not does speak to her moral character and to her ability to adjudicate objectively according to existing law regarding homosexuality. But there are even more substantive aspects of her qualifications, i.e. her anti-military stance, her abortion advocacy, her hostility toward freedom of speech, etc.

  3. I didn't know if she had ever made any comments either way. I can't disagree with anything you said except ' it would be nice to know'. There was some speculation about Condoleesa Rice as well, but I didn't give a hoot in holler as long as did her job.

    If Kagan can do her job without letting her personal sexual preferences pollute her thinking, then as you said , I don't give a hoot in holler about it either.