Posted on 12/05/2006 1:32:50 PM PST by Caleb1411
Thanks to C-SPAN, a vital public service, I was able to see and hear on Nov. 8 the two hours of oral arguments at the Supreme Court on one of the most persistently passionate controversies in the nation — partial-birth abortion; or, as its medical practitioners call it, intact dilation and extraction.
What fascinated me throughout the debate — and the reactions of the justices — was, as George Orwell put it, the way language can be, and is so often used, "as an instrument which we shape for our own purposes." Only rarely did any participant speak plainly about the procedure.
In his essay "Politics and the English Language," Orwell said, "What is above all needed (in honest speaking) is to let the meaning choose the word, and not the other way about."
During the two hours, I often heard references to "fetal demise." What they were actually talking about, some of us would say, is the killing of a human being.
That plain intent of abortion slipped in briefly when Solicitor General Paul Clement, speaking for the government, said the important issue is whether this form of abortion "is to be performed in utero or when the child is halfway outside the womb."(A child? Where?)
Justice John Paul Stevens quickly interrupted: "Whether the FETUS is more than halfway out," he corrected the solicitor general.
"Some of the fetuses, I understand in the procedure," Justice Stevens added, "are only 4 or 5 inches long. They're very different from fully formed babies."
Babies had again crawled into the discussion — but not for long. The abortion procedure at issue is D&X, intact dilation and extraction, which removes babies from existence. Years ago, the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who was for abortion rights, nonetheless called this D&X procedure, "only minutes
(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...
Nice! I'm going to steal that!
These observations may help explain the word twisting by people who are up to no good, abortionists, euthanazis and American reporters among them.
Hentoff is great, except when he's about to put Hitlery up for canonization for voting against the Military Commissions Act, and other such blind spots. His soul will be saved but the republic may be lost.
Hentoff wrote a memorable and hard-hitting series of columns defending Terri Schiavo. It did not endear him to his own Village Voice readers, but he was resolute. In fact, he was one of the earlier voices to speak up for Terri. He covered the story for several years. As he put it in one column, he is an atheist, so in his view, life is all we have. The right to life is fundamental.
You may have it on a silver platter with my compliments! I also use: "Well, I wouldn't beat my wife, but I'm not going to interefere with someone else's family matters. That's exactly the reasoning used just a couple of generations ago, when women were considered a husband's property, just like an unborn baby is considered a woman's property today."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.