Neil Steinberg thinks Obama is coming to ND to give a lecture or take part in a debate in which there is delicious free flow of ideas, when he is coming as political ceremony.
Where in Catholic theology does it say that they are not allowed to hear other perspectives?
He compares Cardinal George at the editorial board table to the #1 political figure at a graduation podium, with honorary degree thrown in.
I don’t recall anyone here complaining, “Why are we letting this guy in here?
He thinks the issue is what Obama thinks or believes about abortion, when that is beside the point, which is public policy as regards abortion.
So the question is how bad should a president’s policy be before an institution takes away the welcome mat and bestowal of esteem and honors? George sees policy gone awry to that extent, Notre Dame doesn’t. How bad should it be before Notre Dame draws a line? How immoral on its face?
Steinberg is unimpressed by arguments against abortion, but George is. He thinks it’s time to draw the line.
Later: Look, even Congress members get it, that some invitations imply approval, as in a House committee having former AIG chairman “Hank” Greenberg to testify:
Rep. Darrell Issa (Calif.), the top Republican on the panel, suggested it shouldn’t even be hosting Greenberg because of the many legal entanglements.
And he came to tell them something most of them thought they ought to hear about.
Yet later: Here’s an idea for the Sun-Times, where Steinberg works: Bring back Tom Roeser as a columnist, thus demonstrating liberal openness to others’ ideas. At his blog, Roeser counts the ways in which Obama policy decisions make him anathema to the pro-life community.