A Substantive Problem With Elena Kagan
Ξ June 30th, 2010 | → Comments Off | ∇ Politics |
During the Clinton Administration, the White House fought against a Congressional ban on partial-birth abortion. An important part of the administration argument, and subsequent court battles over the issue, was the findings of a panel from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists that partial-birth abortion “may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman.”
The problem is that wasn’t the finding of any of the doctors on the panel. It was language inserted by Elena Kagan, serving as a political adviser to Clinton. The draft document said that the panel “could identify no circumstances under which this procedure . . . would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman.” Kagan said that this language was politically disastrous, and had to be changed, which it subsequently was in the official statement from the ACOG.
If you have ever complained of political meddling in the affairs of science under Bush, I do not see how Elena Kagan, after these revelations, can be considered acceptable.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
