Counterbias: Why I Have Declined a Seat on the Alito Bandwagon

Why I Have Declined a Seat on the Alito Bandwagon

February 6 2006
Counterbias.com
by Angela Wittman
E X P L I C I T L Y C H R I S T I A N

A double minded man is unstable in all his ways. (James 1:8, KJV)

Now that Samuel Alito has been confirmed to the supreme Court, I have received numerous endorsements, praises and letters of applause from leading conservative organizations who are riding high on his appointment to the Supreme Court as a pro-life victory... But is it really? Or have these groups been taken for a ride?

As for me, I have declined to take a seat on the Alito bandwagon, and here are just a few reasons why:

On November 15, 2005, it was reported in the Associated Press article "Alito Downplays 1985 Abortion Statement" that when Sen. Dianne Feinstein had questioned Judge Alito about a document in which he stated to the Reagan administration that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion" he evasively replied "I was an advocate seeking a job...I'm now a judge...I'm not an advocate, I don't give heed to my personal views..." His response is neither decisive nor forthright, but reeks of cowardice.

Then I read news reports that pointed out that Judge Alito had previously ruled on four pro-life cases, and three of the four rulings were against the pro-life position:

In 1997, in Alexander v. Whitman, Alito concurred with the appellate court's decision that a fetus is not a person under the equal protection clause of the Constitution. A woman who delivered a stillborn baby had challenged a New Jersey law, arguing that she should be able to file a wrongful death lawsuit.
In 2000, in Planned Parenthood of Central New Jersey v. Farmer, Alito was among the judges who invalidated a New Jersey law banning late-term abortions. He cited the high court's decision on a Nebraska statute.
In 1995, in Blackwell v. Knoll, Alito cited federal government policy in voting to invalidate Pennsylvania restrictions on publicly funded abortions for women who are victims of rape or incest.

(These excerpts are from the news report “Alito’s abortion stance tough to decipher,” USA Today, Nov. 26, 2005)

These rulings caused some pro-life leaders to be concerned about Judge Alito’s nomination, but publicity of their concern was soon drowned out by the accolades of wealthier, more neocon friendly conservative groups, which do not represent all pro-lifers and Constitutionalists.

Now I am wondering if the "pro-family groups" applauding the appointment of Judge Alito are resting easy since they think they have won a major victory? I pray their conscience will keep them awake at night, and they will quickly come to the conclusion that the heinous sin of child-sacrifice cannot be condoned any longer for any reason or exception. I also hope that as they lay claim to be winning the war on child killing through incremental compromise, they will see the reality that they are contributing to the continuance of the preborn babies being murdered. Then perhaps we will see a pro-life victory take place, and the popular “pro-family” groups will demand real change by supporting men who are not double-minded when it comes to child sacrifice. But until this takes place, I will continue to decline a seat on the neocon bandwagon.

Angela Wittman is a resident of Southwestern Illinois and enjoys writing essays and explicitly Christian political commentaries with an emphasis on reformed theology, and our Christian heritage. To learn more about Angela, visit angelawittman.net.