The Discourse on Sebelius and the Group of 26

I have received several emails since posting Sebelius, the Group of 26, and Orwell’s America yesterday.  About half were extremely positive and appreciative.  The other half, including one from an MOJ blogger and another from one member of the Group of 26, were, shall we say, distinctively less positive.  And, I must say that I am extremely frustrated in the level of discourse (and lack of argument) by those who disliked my post.  One responder simply said that my post “disgusted” him.  Another suggested that I must have been motivated by anger/outrage “to cross the line by accusing [the Group of 26] of wanting to turn the pro-life movement into a pro-abortion-rights movement – and as much as saying that they are lying (about Sebelius) in their effort to do so.”  Another said, “I am not likely to be swayed by the evaluation of one of the most unenlightened and thoroughly unpastoral bishops I have ever encountered.”  That person also said that I was full of “judgmental crap offered from the Olympus of moral certitude.”

What is missing from all of these emails is even the attempt at refuting my (and Archbishop Naumann’s) accusations.  In short, name calling substitutes for reasoned argument in these emails.

I accuse the Group of 26 of engaging in making a material misrepresentation (the less polite word is, as one reader pointed out, “lying”).  The material misrepresentation is partly by omission – the Group of 26 tells us how Sebelius is good at reducing abortion but they fail to tell us about her opposition to even modest abortion regulations.  The Archbishop goes further, suggesting, I think accurately, that the Group of 26 is engaged in an affirmative misrepresentation when they claim that  "She’s made clear she agrees with Church teaching that abortion is wrong and has lived and acted according to that belief."  If I am wrong in my judgment – if I am wrong in my accusation, please let me know.  If you disagree with my assessment, please resist the temptation to resort to name calling and resort to good old fashioned argument instead.

I also accuse the Group of 26 of engaging in preemptive name calling by accusing her opponents of demagoguery.  They say “we also reject the tactics of those who would use Gov. Sebelius’ faith to attack her. As Catholics, we find such partisan use of our religion regrettable and divisive.”  This is a very convenient rhetorical strategy, which dismisses an opponents arguments before they can even be presented.  If I am wrong in my judgment – if I am wrong in my accusation, please let me know.  If you disagree with my assessment, please resist the temptation to resort to name calling and resort to good old fashioned argument instead.