Is Elena Kagan Morally Blind?

American Thinker ^ | July 03, 2010 | James Lewis

[neverdem]

Elena Kagan has now admitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee that as a Clinton lawyer in 1997, she fraudulently revised an official medical opinion by the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. The medical society was going to publicly reveal that "its panel of experts found no circumstances in which the (partial birth abortion) procedure was the only option for saving the life of the woman."

In a secret internal memo, she wrote that "This, of course, would be a disaster[.]"

Kagan therefore secretly revised the language so the final statement in 1997 claimed that the partial-birth abortion "may be the best and most appropriate procedure in particular circumstances to save the life or preserve the health of the woman."

That was a pernicious lie. The medical panel originally said that was false. Kagan substituted her own judgment for a medical consensus.

No wonder eight hundred Jewish rabbis have publicly stated that in their opinion, Elena Kagan is not morally qualified to be on the Supreme Court. Her fraudulent actions in 1997 legally authorized the killing of approximately two thousand newborns or almost-newborns each year, according to the pro-abortion Gutmacher Institute.

Partial birth abortion means killing a full-term fetus, a human being. That is murder by biological definition. The media try to throw dust in our eyes about that fact, but most Americans know. We might have mixed feelings about abortion in the first month of pregnancy, but a full-term baby is a human being, and whether it is killed ten minutes before or after delivery makes no difference. It's still the same baby.

What part of "Thou Shalt Not Kill" don't liberals understand? These are the most compassionate people in the world, remember? Elena Kagan doesn't seem to get the biological reality of babies who are identical to newborns but still living in the womb. She seems to be so stuck that she cannot see reality.

In 2003, the Republicans passed a ban on partial birth abortion, later affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. That lead has now been followed by a number of states. But a recent medical article on the 2003 Partial Birth Abortion Act claims that the law only forced abortion doctors to kill fetuses in the womb. That's not "partial birth," get it? You can do anything to a baby in the womb, no matter how developed it might be. These "abortion providers" are publicly boasting that they are getting around the law by killing near-term babies in the womb. It is astonishing what ideological blindness will do to people.

I know Miss Kagan is Jewish by heritage, but that only makes her more painful to watch. Of all the people in the world, the Jews, whose babies and toddlers were taken away to be killed by the Nazis, should be hypersensitive to this question. Dr. Kagan is a woman, and we think women are especially sensitive to babies. And yet, in a once-in-a-lifetime moment of decision in 1997, Kagan failed to stand for the most basic protection of innocent life.

Elena Kagan has some terrifying opinions about the government's ability to kill free speech. At Harvard she was part of the feminist establishment that got Larry Summers fired as president for dropping a politically incorrect remark. Kagan is no defender of free speech, not even on university campuses where telling the truth is the essence of scholarship. Just the opposite. We have censorship on our campuses today because of the likes of Dean Kagan.

In front of the Judiciary Committee she's been clowning it up. But I don't think Kagan is a funny lady. No, when I look at her, I look at a commissar of Political Correctness, who rose to the top at Harvard Law in the New Age of PC. Stalin's Commissars also made sure the right people died in Siberia and Lublyanka.

We know that premature babies born in the third trimester respond to touch, pain, cuddling, and baby talk. Many biomedical articles in peer-reviewed journals support that claim. Others dispute it, but when there is honest disagreement, we should follow the ancient medical rule: First, Do No Harm!

The  brain waves of third-trimester fetuses show that they go through sleeping, dreaming, and waking. The closer they grow to term, the more they are just like any other baby. And then you kill them at the moment of birth -- not in a desperate bid to save the life of the mother, but because it's not convenient to raise a Down Syndrome child? And then we don't even mandate general anesthesia for the baby, the way we do for convicted killers on death row?

Is this the person we want on the Supreme Court? 

[Theodore R.]

He has the same morals as the American people, and that’s why she will be overwhelmingly confirmed. Of course, most of the American people have don’t know who she is.

[potlatch]

Morally blind.......a heart black from sin no longer recognizes it.

[Ted Grant]

No - she is a typical smug, self satisfied white liberal elitist.

[happygrl]

The Jewish Sandhedrin required that only married men with children could sit on their Court of Law.

This life experience is what develops wisdom.

So much for the childless “wise Latina” Sotomayer and this Kagan, not to mention Souter, who turned out to be among the worst appointments ever.

This court would be seriously imbalanced with the addition of husbandless, childless Kagan who obviously has missed out on developing authentic human empathies.

[happygrl]

She should be borked.

[muawiyah]

Kagan reminds me a lot of Abe Fortas. He too was a knee-jerk, robot-like, leftwinger into remodeling children's laws (his specialty?).

Abe's big problem was TAKING MONEY he should not have taken. None of the sums were huge ~ but given the value of the dollar at the time and what government employees got paid, they were certainly handsome ~ enough to get a decision a subtle shift I am sure.

Still, it was his predictable and dependable kow-tow to the left in every single case he handled on the SCOTUS that made him so popular with LBJ and his trashy array of crooks and wastrals.

Kagan promises us no more than did Fortas. She'll probably deliver much of the same. I'd start looking for the special donors now!

[raybbr]

It's morally blind. It's how they think. They have been told all their lives that it is impolitic to judge so they are amoral.

For a really good explanation listen to Evan Sayet describe it for the Heritage Foundation: HERITAGE FOUNDATION: "How Modern Liberals Think"