A couple of weeks ago, I had a ton of fun with the Women's Bioethics Project. They released a report that was titled "God's Bioethics." (and still is tonight, on the front page and on the "news" page, but I keep expecting them to change that).
I received a comment from Linda McDonald Glenn, JD,LLM,, one of the Founding members, supporters and bloggers of the WBP.
Ms. McDonald thinks I over reacted about the "God's Bioethics" report:
was never intended to be politically-motivated, mean-spirited or divisive -- and like you, I'm not big on the "us" vs "them" labels. In fact, I see lots of ways that both conservatives and progressives could potentially work together on issues.
Okay, if it's not political, devisive, or even mean-spirited, why would Ms. Glenn emphasize political divisions, use words such as "overtly religious," etc.?
Perhaps the Women's Project should look at that information above about the Soros and RWJF money that seeded all those end of life and assisted suicide (which, are not all the same) organizations and bioethics centers at major universities - neither the money nor the organizations are "overtly religious" or "conservative."
No comments:
Post a Comment