Mendenhall Lecture to focus on racial justice

Thursday, February 20, 2020
Austin Channing Brown

The Center for Spiritual Life at DePauw University will welcome author and lecturer Austin Channing Brown for the annual Mendenhall Lecture on Tuesday, March 3.

The 7:30 p.m. lecture is free and open to the public, and will be held at Gobin Memorial United Methodist Church.

The lecture will touch on “how white, middle-class, Christian evangelicalism has participated in an era of rising racial hostility, and how we might confront our own apathy, recognize God’s ongoing work in the world, and discover how blackness — if we let it — can save us all.”

Channing Brown is considered a leading figure in racial justice causes, and her 2018 Amazon bestselling book “I’m Still Here: Black Dignity in a World Made for Whiteness” has received acclaim from Kirkus Reviews, Publishers Weekly and Booklist.

She worked for nonprofits that focused on homelessness, youths, fundraising and the ministry before turning full time to writing and speaking. She is co-creator and the executive producer of “The Next Question,” a video web series about racial justice.

“Channing Brown’s work aligns with both the core values of our institution and the intention of the Mendenhall Lecture, encouraging us to see diversity and inclusion through the lens of faith,” said the Rev. Dr. Maureen Knudsen Langdoc, university chaplain and associate dean. “Her work not only illuminates the ways in which white, middle-class evangelicalism has participated in racial hostility, but also gives voice to hope. We are honored to have her deliver this year’s Mendenhall Lecture.”

The lecture series traces back to 1905, when the Rev. Dr. Marmaduke H. Mendenhall endowed it to bring scholars and advocates to campus to discuss broad issues related to Christianity.

This lecture is supported by the Bishop Matthew Simpson Endowment and the Kerrilla Beamer Fund.

Comments
View 40 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • *

    Racist. (See what I did there?)

    Apparently Ms Brown believes that history starts yesterday, so that she may have a clean slate to dream up whatever racial/social justice schemes she wants to promote.

    8 years of Barack Obama as POTUS disproves her theory of racism. He wouldn't have been elected - twice - without a signicant number of whites voting for him, a large number of those being evangelicals.

    Not only does she completely ignore this simple fact, she doubles down on her own racism by saying such things as "discover how blackness — if we let it — can save us all". As if "blackness" (whatever that is?) is so superior to anything else that it is the only thing that can redeem. (Again, from what exactly are we being redeemed?) Racial superiority is ok if its black superiority?

    Thank you, DePauw University, for showing your true colors (pardon the pun)...

    Rev MLKjr once spoke of judging a person by their character and not the color of their skin.

    DePauw prefers someone who speaks of judging not only by skin color but religious affiliation.

    Booker T. Washington was right: “There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.”

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Thu, Feb 20, 2020, at 1:48 PM
  • Dreadpirateroberts- black people still experience racism today. You should try to have more empathy for people and maybe you won't feel so angry and mean towards them.

    While some people still want to treat black culture and being black as a negative, sounds like she is trying to show that it is a positive for everyone.

    How about you imagine being black for a minute, and the generations of abuse and less than human treatment, countless acts of hatefulness and violence, living your life everyday worried about running into that hateful person that treat you badly, or worse. Your kids, your parents treated like that. Even today! The generations of social and economic suppression. How's that feel? Think about that. That should help you understand alot about american black culture being different from white culture. Learning to live and thrive despite all that is something that can help people.

    What Booker T. Washington probably didn't realize was how hateful people would take his remarks that were probably made about a few select individuals, and use it to justify abusing a whole race of people.

    But that's what hateful people do, right? Similar example, they know somebody that doesn't work but is capable, and receiving government assistance, and use that to justify getting rid of assistance programs, when actually the overwhelming majority of people who use government assistance really need it, and fraud accounts for a small fraction of it.

    -- Posted by Raker on Thu, Feb 20, 2020, at 6:56 PM
  • Sigh. Point missed all around.

    -- Posted by techphcy on Thu, Feb 20, 2020, at 7:17 PM
  • Techphcy, I was responding to his comment not the article. I stand behind every word I said. What is your point, if you even have one?

    -- Posted by Raker on Thu, Feb 20, 2020, at 7:54 PM
  • I think something about this article or my comments touched a nerve with techphcy.......

    -- Posted by Raker on Thu, Feb 20, 2020, at 8:31 PM
  • Raker,

    Sadly, we only look or position ourselves from a singular perspective rather than full picture, especially when emotion becomes involved. I am guilty of this often. I have found a "scales" approach is best for most issues. Not all, but most.

    Will Rogers had a great saying regarding his Cherokee background- when they had an issue, the 2 parties had to take the other's position.

    -- Posted by beg on Thu, Feb 20, 2020, at 8:55 PM
  • Beg, thanks for your perspective. I am imperfect and don't have all the answers. I am not trying to be high-minded or superior, just trying to do good things, and I will try to be humble about it. Written comments makes us all sound so smart and wise, don't they?

    -- Posted by Raker on Thu, Feb 20, 2020, at 9:39 PM
  • They do!!!!!

    -- Posted by beg on Thu, Feb 20, 2020, at 11:23 PM
  • *

    Raker -

    I am sure that some black people do experience racism every day. I am sure that some white people experience racism every day. Same with every other group of people when dealing with yet another group of people. It happens.

    Instead of reading my original post with a knee-jerk reaction to virtue-signal, how about you read it with some simple logic?

    I interact with black people every day; some familiar, some strangers. We interact like people...not white people and black people, but just people. One is a landlord who constantly disparages some, but not all, other blacks b/c of who they are and how they act. (He refuses to do ANY section 8 housing anymore b/c of what he has dealt with first hand by some black people.)

    This is the way MOST of society is... predominantly color-blind, basing their opinions on their own personal experiences and taking people as they are, individually. Sure they may have opinions about people-groups as a whole (i.e. the "culture" of people groups) and its possible that those opinions are less than their opinion of a particular person within that people group. Sometimes you will find this completely within their own people groups. (Jesse Jackson's admission of nervousness when seeing a group of black men approaching him comes to mind.)

    However, there are people (like Ms. Brown) who carry a chip on their shoulder and use the color of their skin as a cudgel to bully people. She is painting every white evangelical Christian with the same brush regardless of whether she knows anything about them. To her, its not anything they have done to her personally, it is the fact that they are white evangelical Christians. She is doing the same thing that David Duke does with blacks, Jews, and anyone else he doesn't like. You seem willing to defend her...will you defend him?

    Perhaps you missed the news recently of a POC (her words) at an eastern university who was promoting SEGREGATION of a public space b/c she claims she was uncomfortable by being around white people. Her grandparents and many others before her are probably rolling in their graves... they spent years, some gave their lives, for integration into society only then to have little Ms. POC calling for segregation. At least Malcolm X would be smirking.

    Same with Ms. Brown, who is being brought in by DePauw - not to heal any racial strife (real or imagined) and talk about coming together as Americans but to lecture white people on how "blackness" can save the otherwise evil white evangelical Christian.

    I think Mr. Washington's point was very clear.

    You may interpret it as you wish.

    I think my point was pretty clear as well.

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 9:15 AM
  • *

    Raker - then there is this:

    "But that's what hateful people do, right? Similar example, they know somebody that doesn't work but is capable, and receiving government assistance, and use that to justify getting rid of assistance programs, when actually the overwhelming majority of people who use government assistance really need it, and fraud accounts for a small fraction of it."

    You seem quick to cast the label of "hate"...but perhaps you are (unknowingly?) socially conditioned to do so.

    I am one of those people who believe in the elimination of "government assistance".

    While fraud is a LARGE part of the problem - and I would be interested to hear just how much money of yours you would be willing to throw away or give to undeserving people - I justify getting rid of government assistance based on the FACT that it is unconstitutional. (It's not the government's job.)

    That's not hate.

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 9:33 AM
  • Dreadpirateroberts... Sometimes it's a matter of trying to understand how or why someone see the world through the lens that they do. That's for everyone on either side of the race, social justice or economic arguments. It's hard for me to see that willingness to understand in some of your comments. I'm guessing that you have never read Ms. Browns book to gain any understanding of her viewpoint. I have an extra copy that I would love to give you if you're interested. I can leave it at the Banner under your screen name to allow you to protect your anonymity. I would also love to save you a seat at the lecture and buy you a coffee afterwards to discuss further. Back and forths with quotes and quips on these types of forums often appear more as self righteous grandstanding vs. an attempt to engage in useful conversation. I'm sure that most people don't want that, so that's why I'm extending the offer. If nothing else, take the book. If you don't like it... use it for kindling.

    -- Posted by rharvey75 on Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 1:16 PM
  • *

    Rharvey75 - That's a kind offer, but I wouldn't waste five minutes reading her racist screed. She is aligned with people such as W.E.B DuBois (marxist/socialist/Pan-African "scholar") and Ta Nahisi Coates (black racist) to name but a few. Racist agitators that take a distorted view of history so that they may continue to capitalize on the chaos they sow.

    You are perfectly welcome to suffer from white guilt for some imaginary trespass. I refuse.

    She may have had some difficulties in life. I don't discount that...its her experience.

    But when she takes her experience and paints all white evangelicals with such a broad brush (as I have pointed out at least twice now) - that isn't (and shouldn't be) acceptable.

    Condaleeza Rice, Clarence Thomas, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Booker T. Washington... all black, and all had to deal with much more than Ms. Brown did in her life. And yet all of them rose to the tops of their professions. And did so in this so-called oppressive white America. (I purposely omit Obama from this list b/c he grew up in privilege.)

    I have been engaging in useful discussion. (History and facts are on my side.)

    You have engaged in self-righteous grandstanding. (Your tone and choice of words is deliberately patronizing, and you seem to prefer subjective emotion over objective reason.)

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 2:02 PM
  • Dreadpirateroberts, you're right, racism DOES happen.

    You are making lots of assumptions about the points she is going to make based on the title of her lecture. You really should attend or maybe read her book, that way your anger can be based on facts.

    A college kid that made a statement you believe is racist against white people, at a multicultural center, does not come anywhere close to being equal to what she and her family have likely experienced, not even close. The multitudes of examples of racism towards black people. I would be more sympathetic to your point of view if it weren't based only on anecdotes and assumptions.

    And I'm okay with paying taxes for programs. There will always be a small percentage of people that take advantage. The facts are unemployment fraud rate estimated at 3% in 2011 according to federal reserve, that is pretty low.

    -- Posted by Raker on Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 2:25 PM
  • *

    Raker - I am making assumptions about the points she is going to make based on her own words, not the title of her lecture (which is not mentioned).

    You keep labelling me as angry or hateful - yet I have not said anything that is either angry or hateful.I have merely made statements of fact and given my opinions. It's too bad that social conditioning has had such an impact on you.

    If you fail to see my point of view its b/c you refuse to... the truth is out there.

    It's nice that you are okay with paying taxes for unconstitutional programs. I am not. (But that is another topic for another time.)

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 3:37 PM
  • Dreadpiratespirates ok whatever man, you're being irrational. I only commented in the first place because you attacking people was upsetting me. I was just starting to have fun leaving comments online, too. But I don't want people to think I wear a tin foil hat so I will probably chill now.

    -- Posted by Raker on Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 4:29 PM
  • *

    Raker - LOL

    You claim I am hateful, angry, irrational, and now I am attacking people bc I called out this lady's racism.

    And of course, this upsets you and ruins your fun.

    Let's be honest... you cannot refute anything I have said and all you have is this: to try to place the blame on me.

    It's ok. I have dealt with similar people who wish to pick fights and then claim victim status when they are losing.

    I don't take it personally.

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 7:00 PM
  • DePauw gets a daily double here! A speaker against white people AND Christians!! Wow! The Old Gold is proud!

    -- Posted by Avenger1234 on Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 7:06 PM
  • Just stop bullying people.....

    -- Posted by Raker on Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 7:10 PM
  • *

    Raker -

    I am sorry to inform you that your victim card has been declined...Would you like to try another?

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 8:21 PM
  • Yeah I have a card for you, just let me know where to drop it off, tough guy.

    -- Posted by Raker on Fri, Feb 21, 2020, at 9:09 PM
  • WOW!!

    -- Posted by goingon80 on Sat, Feb 22, 2020, at 12:24 PM
  • I should let this thread die, but wanted to add one last thing for any other readers. I had to look up what virtue signaling was. It's not a real thing, just a made-up word only a few years old, made up by a far-right british politician to demonize and browbeat left-leaning individuals, by saying they don't have sincere feelings about anything they say or stand for, they are just saying or doing it to "signal" like they are doing a good thing to trick people and get attention. What a ridiculous concept.

    -- Posted by Raker on Sat, Feb 22, 2020, at 8:13 PM
  • I’m just stunned how this is supposed to be portrayed as a ‘coming together’ presentation when at the get go it blames ‘white, evangelical, Christians’ as the root problem. This isn’t to build bridges, it is designed to stamp out white Christians as a influential group. ‘Racism’ is used so broadly and any time electoral results don’t suit certain people it has lost meaning. The charge isn’t administered fairly either, see Gov. Northam as exhibit A, as long as said politician is down for the struggle on gun control and killing unborn, and now born, babies.

    -- Posted by Avenger1234 on Sun, Feb 23, 2020, at 8:32 AM
  • It's not saying white evangelical christians are the root problem, it just says they participated in an era of racial hostility. Her argument does sound radical. I understand how it can be offensive. But if it is fact-based and honest is what is important. In the last three years, reported hate crimes on people of color have risen, not fallen. It says this lady is very involved in the church, so I don't believe she is attacking christianity.

    By the way, nobody wants to kill born babies, that's a lie used to win support and government power, and to take support away from rivals and people who support a person's right to choose. If a child has such fetal abnormalities that it will not survive, it is safer for the mother than going through labor. There is no abortion that would survive outside the womb, that is a lie.

    -- Posted by Raker on Sun, Feb 23, 2020, at 10:43 AM
  • Raker,

    You should really consider your last paragraph on multiple levels.

    -- Posted by beg on Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 7:56 AM
  • Beg, people who want to outlaw abortion are always trying to confuse people and play word games about the facts. Abortion has always existed and always will. If you don't believe it is right, then don't ever have one. Either we give women a safe way to do it, or they will do it on their own in desperation and possibly kill or permanently injure themselves.

    -- Posted by Raker on Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 8:19 AM
  • *

    Raker -

    Hmmmm...I must've touched a nerve.

    Again, your projection is showing... I simply said that your victim card is declined. You decided to bring threats of physical violence, and yet you wish to label me with "tough guy" as though I am some sort of bully.

    Please keep typing. You are a treat.

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 8:58 AM
  • You are a provocateur wanting to start fights and bully people, and I'm not going to respond to your nonsense anymore. You sound like you need some medication and therapy.

    -- Posted by Raker on Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 11:40 AM
  • *

    Raker -

    Thank you for that. LOL.

    You are proving my point over and over.

    I started the conversation pointing out the racist nature of this woman, using facts, evidence, and reason.

    You have continually responded by inferring things not true about me in an attempt to cancel me b/c you cannot simply argue against what I have said.

    I have no problems with people disagreeing with me. Some might even have a point to make. I may, just may, even concede that point.

    But let me make sure I understand where you are: To you I am angry, hateful, a bully, a tough guy, nonsensical, and need medication and therapy... all b/c I think that this lady is a racist agitator...and while I have demonstrated my reasons for believing such, you have nothing to offer but personal attacks.

    As I said, you are a treat.

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 12:30 PM
  • Dread, your half-facts and half-truths don't prove crap. You are being dishonest.

    Your very first point is that because we had a black president, racism is no problem for black people anymore? Ridiculous statement. 65 million votes out of over 300 million people. Then you pick apart the statement about "blackness" as though you know exactly what she means by that, your statement is ignorant.

    I don't threaten people, but maybe you felt intimidated the same way you are always trying to intimidate everyone that has a point of view you disagree with?

    Your silly username from that kids movie, the profile pic that says whitey... and why are you always picking apart everything Brand Selvia writes and insulting him, like a sociopath?

    You seriously act pathological and are unable to stop.

    -- Posted by Raker on Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 12:44 PM
  • *

    Raker -

    Let's try this slowly...

    My point about Obama being elected twice is to show that, despite Ms. Brown's declaration that white evangelical Christians are evil racists (as a group), it was white evangelical Christians that helped elect Obama...thereby disproving that her notion that, as a group, all white evangelical Christians are racist. Even if her personal history includes racism at the hands of some white evangelical Christians (not knowing her personal history I withhold comment on that part), it does not give her the right to paint ALL in that group as racists.

    Now, you may disagree with my interpretation of what she has said. That is your right. (Hint: This is where you could simply say "that's your opinion and you're welcome to it", or you could try to counter with some rational statement that would cause me to reconsider.)

    As for the statement about "blackness"...I specifically said "(whatever that is?)" b/c I do not know exactly what she means. That it isn't defined anywhere means that it too is open for interpretation. Did you not see the "?" at the end of those statements? You know - to show that it is a question in search of an answer.

    Perhaps you should look up the word "ignorant". I don't think it means what you think it means. (See that? Another Princess Bride reference, just for you...lol)

    You don't threaten people? LOL... "Yeah I have a card for you, just let me know where to drop it off, tough guy." People with limited English could decipher that as a veiled threat of violence.

    And I don't threaten or intimidate anyone. Lots of people disagree with me. That's fine. It doesn't bother me a bit. I might come back at them...might even have some testy exchanges...but I am just a guy with thoughts, as I have stated numerous times throughout my posting history here. That's not exactly intimidating. (Now, you could label me as "argumentative" and you would be more right than wrong. It's not personal towards anyone, its a family character trait. You might think we were from Missouri...LOL.)

    Oh no!! Now you're gonna call me out on my username? LOL - are you in grade school?

    My profile pic has been there for a very long time... and it's just funny (or ironic) that it's so fitting in this conversation.

    Why are you trying to deflect (again!) from the topic at hand? If you are interested in my opinions on Mr. Selvia's writing, perhaps you should address them in the proper forum - on his blogs where I post them.

    Now we can add "sociopath" and "pathological" to my list of character identifiers according to you? LOL - I might put this list on my mirror. I am always on the lookout for some affirmations.

    Seriously though, you might want to reach out to someone...

    Until then,do you actually have anything to contribute to the conversation at hand about Ms. Brown's lecture and what appears to be an anti-white racist tone?

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 2:15 PM
  • Dear Dreadpirateroberts,

    We all appreciate you taking a pause from writing your manifesto to post gibberish in this newspaper comments section.

    -- Posted by Raker on Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 2:27 PM
  • *

    Raker - LOL.

    Now it's gibberish? (You are an absolute delight!)

    Try this...from the mouth of Ms. Brown:

    "I think what a lot of white Christian institutions do is they try to collapse that diversity for the sake of unity."

    The true church of Christ is ALL believers that confess Jesus as our redeemer.

    It has nothing to do with diversity, and everything to do with that one single unity: Jesus.

    Ms Brown is a racial agitator, inciting disruption inside Christ's church.

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 3:20 PM
  • *

    More insight from Ms. Brown:

    "[Ms. Brown] wanted to move the conversation forward by sharing her experiences that showed how hard and sometimes dangerous it can be for a black woman navigating white Christian spaces, while also celebrating blackness."

    Exactly how is it "dangerous" for a black woman to navigate white Christian spaces?

    And just what are "white" Christian spaces?

    And why are we celebrating "blackness" in Church when we should be celebrating God and Jesus?

    My church has blacks, whites, asians, and who knows what else...why don't we know? B/c we don't care. Race isn't why we are there.

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 3:27 PM
  • *

    Raker - fyi...in case you can't read it, my avatar doesn't say "Whitey", it is a parody of a Little Golden Book that is titled "Let's Blame Whitey".

    (Sorry it took so long to correct this error on your part. It's just there were so many, I overlooked this one.)

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 4:08 PM
  • Alot of these hypotheticals would be answered if you would take time and do the research first. I like this woman more now because you don't, and I feel she is nicer and safer to be around than someone with your personality.

    -- Posted by Raker on Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 4:08 PM
  • *

    Raker -

    Not hypotheticals. Questions. There is a difference.

    You may like whomever you wish...and if you wish to keep company with racists and socialists that is on you.

    More from Ms. Brown: "The very idea of race was created in order to establish white superiority and thereby justify the institution of slavery for the profit of white America."

    Not exactly a history major, I think... (Slavery, as an institution, has been around pretty much since the dawn of civilization. Certainly well before America was founded. In fact, it was very common in Africa...and still is -albeit quietly now.)

    For some reason she completely overlooks (or perhaps disregards) some factual history regarding slavery in that there were WHITE slaves as well as BLACK slave owners.

    In fact, the first person to go to court to have his slave declared "chattel" (there is a word for you to look up) was... A BLACK SLAVE OWNER.

    Of course, as I first mentioned (at the beginning of all of this) - history doesn't exist as a set of facts for people like her. Like destroying Confederate statues and erasing history, they wish to obliterate factual history and replace it with their own version of history so that it becomes whatever they need it to be at the time. "We have always been at war with Eastasia." (That's an Orwell reference from 1984 - the book, not the year - if you didn't know.)

    Or maybe we could just look at all the code words Ms Brown uses (you know, since you took offense to my use of the term "virtue signal"): racial justice/racial injustice; diversity (as a social construct); systemic racism; "health disparities, income disparities, ownership disparities, employment disparities, environmental disparities, criminal justice disparities, mental health disparities, and educational disparities" (taken from her own blog).

    Do you think I should do some more research?

    -- Posted by dreadpirateroberts on Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 4:59 PM
  • Raker,

    You can't really believe your statement on abortion. I have met people who passionately believe abortion should be available up until moment of birth. I have met with and discussed their positions with them.

    Please don't demean the abortion conversation into such a narrow place that is less than intellectually honest.

    -- Posted by beg on Wed, Feb 26, 2020, at 8:27 PM
  • Beg,

    I'm sorry for trying to simplify this issue into a paragraph. Of course, there are extremists on every issue, as well as pro-choice purists who will say that in order for a woman to have total freedom over her body, she should be able to have an abortion at any time, up to the time of labor.

    However, I have never talked to anybody or heard any news reports ever of a woman who would carry a healthy pregnancy to term and then decide for abortion instead of birth. Even the article I read about the Virginia bill said that since the year 2000 only two abortions have been performed in the third trimester, and we don't know the circumstances of those. So extremely rare. It looked to me like 99.99 out of 100 people want a common sense approach to this issue so I didn't refer to the extremist viewpoint, or the very rare instances that would have likely been for life threatening or health of the fetus.

    I read an article that talked about how abortion is illegal in Argentina, but the rate of abortions has still risen. Women just do it themselves or in a black market sort of way, the most popular way is poisening themselves by mixing certain perscription drugs. The death rate for women due to complications from these self-done abortions is 8% to 10% annually.

    The main line argument of the abortion debate is what is the point at which a pregnancy is considered viable outside of a woman's body. Or that is my take, am I wrong?

    -- Posted by Raker on Sat, Feb 29, 2020, at 3:19 PM
  • *99.99 out of 100 pro choice supporters is what I meant to say, and I was only stating my opinion. But then I wanted to double check that. I saw an NPR poll from last June, where 18% of pro choice people polled said that they agreed, when asked, that a woman should have the right to have an abortion at any time during her pregnancy. Which means only 82% of people surveyed agreed there should be limitations to abortion. It is hard for me to believe that if those people were asked if they believe a healthy child that could live outside the womb should be able to be aborted legally instead of delivered, they would say yes.

    But I admit that I was wrong, for saying nobody wants to kill babies that are able to survive outside of the womb. 2 cases of third trimester abortions in Virginia in 20 years, however, means that nobody is really trying or willing to do it.

    -- Posted by Raker on Sat, Feb 29, 2020, at 4:08 PM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: