I checked the NCR this morning to see which of their writers would be the first out of the gate to instrumentalize the heinous killing of children in Connecticut to argue for tougher gun control laws.
Would it be Michael Sean Winters? Would it be Sr. Joan Chittister (who still hasn’t gone back to Tahrir Square).
It was Sr. Maureen Fiedler! She is probably trying to get back into the race for Fishwrap’s Person of the Year.
Sr. Fiedler made a little attack on the pro-life movement’s focus on abortion. She is making the claim that gun-control is a pro-life position. How do I know that that is what she is arguing? Here is her piece:
Gun Control: A ‘Pro-Life’ Position
Maureen Fiedler | Dec. 14, 2012
In his Oct. 27, op-ed column in The New York Times, Thomas Friedman said this: “…for me, the most ‘pro-life’ politician in America is New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.”
That may shock some people because Bloomberg is for a woman’s right to choose, and Friedman acknowledged that. But he enumerated several reasons for his pro-life description of Bloomberg, and this one stands out today: “…he has … used his position to … push to reinstate the expired federal ban on assault weapons and other forms of common-sense gun control …” Read the full column.
In the wake of the school shooting and multiple deaths in Connecticut, need we say more?
Yes, Maureen, we need to say more.
You don’t get to co-opt the language of the pro-life movement.
I looked back in the list of your Fishwrap columns, Sister.
You have never written, as far as I could find, anything in defense of the unborn.
Now, in the wake of the disaster in Connecticut, you blather about gun-control being “pro-life”?
Okay, I’ll play along. Let’s undermine the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution.
I, Father John Zuhlsdorf, proud gun-owner, am ready to campaign in favor of a ban on certain “assault weapons” as soon as Pres. Obama endorses a 28th Amendment to the Constitution: The Human Life Amendment.