Yale University president Richard Levin lacks a moral compass: Yale University President Compares Pro-Lifers to Extremists After Abortion Flap
At the American kickoff of a religious foundation former British Prime Minister Tony Blair started, Yale University president Richard Levin made a comment sure to upset the majority of Americans who are pro-life.
He said that pro-life Americans who support the current Bush administration policy of prohibiting taxpayer funding of abortions overseas are like Saudi extremists.
Michael Gerson of the Washington Post reported on the statement in a Wednesday editorial column.
“At an event designed to further mutual religious sympathy, two of the panelists — including the president of Yale University, Richard Levin — casually asserted that religious Americans who support pro-life restrictions on international family planning aid are as doctrinaire and exclusionary as Saudi extremists,” he explained.
Let’s run that one again: Eleven of the September 11, 2001 hijackers were Saudis. They killed over 3,000 people in one day during the worst attack on the North American continent in history. That’s who Levin is comparing to law-abiding American taxpayers who don’t want to fund abortion around the world.
In Levin’s mind, American taxpayers have the obligation to fund abortions everywhere in the world, regardless of their own personal, moral or religious beliefs. Whether the American is a Catholic or a Muslim (both of which oppose abortion) doesn’t matter to him.
Levin also appears to ignore the fact that abortion is a political means of repression in parts of the world, most specifically in China, with its “one child” policy. Abortion as a means of population control is used as a means of coercion and oppression over both men and women, but particularly over women. For instance, Chinese women married to Taiwanese men have been ordered to have abortions on visits home to comply with the mainland’s one-child policy
Abortion can also be used by totalitarian regimes as a means to generate fetal tissue for genetic research and transplants, which is a business in many countries that allow the selling of transplant organs. The woman bearing the unborn child counts for nothing in this equation.
Levin also appears to ignore the fact that abortion is now a most popular means of restricting the number of girls born in a country. While Levin may or may not have been outraged that his predecessor Larry Sommers was fired over his statement that there might be innate difference between men and women, Levin’s apparently not bothered that abortion is a means of female infanticide in China and India.
The resulting shortage of girls can also bring about trafficking in women across borders, as is reportedly happening between Korea and China. Those women are doomed to a life of prostitution and misery.
Levin also appears to ignore the fact that abortion has medical risks. Is the American taxpayer then obligated to pay for that care, too, anywhere in the world? Would Levin also propose making disability payments to women disabled by abortions, and restitution to women who die from a legal abortion, too?
But all that doesn’t bother Levin. He firmly believes that the American taxpayer has the obligation to fund abortion everywhere in the world. He probably lives under the illussion that abortion is a matter of “women excercising their free will over their bodies” everywhere in the world.
To him, the rest of us who oppose it are a bunch of “extremists.”
LifeNews has the contac information for Levin if you would like to contact him.