Newspaper article St Louis Post-Dispatch (MO)

Hillary Clinton Is Inconsistent on Value of Human Life

Newspaper article St Louis Post-Dispatch (MO)

Hillary Clinton Is Inconsistent on Value of Human Life

Article excerpt

There is much to praise in Hillary Rodham Clinton's blunt remarks to the U.N. Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing. Her gutsy defense of human rights was a proper and welcome affirmation of the core values of the United States.

To have been more diplomatic and less forceful would have appeared to China's dictatorial government as weakness. It would have sent a message that America is, indeed, the "paper tiger" Mao Tse-tung used to call us.

Mrs. Clinton said, "It is time for us to say here in Beijing, and the world to hear, that it is no longer acceptable to discuss women's rights as separate from human rights."

Although she didn't mention China specifically, she criticized one-child-per-couple policies and singled out the forced abortions many women are subjected to when they become pregnant with a second or third child.

She is correct, but the greater question is, should the state be determining which lives are worthy to be lived and which are not. It is a very short step between abortion-on-demand to forced abortion to Dr. Jack Kevorkian.

If all human life is not valuable, then no human life has value. This is the overarching political, biological and philosophical issue that must be addressed. We cannot do it piecemeal - for when one category is devalued, all life suffers.

But when one argues a moral point, one must be consistent - or the point is lost in a sea of hypocrisy.

And on abortion, Mrs. Clinton speaks with no moral capital because she is "pro-choice." She thinks it wrong for the American government to prevent women from having abortions if they don't want the child they are carrying. But in Beijing, she said governments should not force women to have abortions against their wishes.

It is too bad that we don't study logic and philosophy in our schools as much as we used to, because Mrs. Clinton has made assertions that are mutually exclusive. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.