Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue

Opinion


J.C. WATTS: Dogfighting barbaric? So is abortion

Sen. Robert Byrd, the West Virginia Democrat, referred to this act as "barbaric." In case you missed it the first time, he repeated it. Again. And again. And yet again.

Byrd acknowledged that he's witnessed one execution in his life, but wouldn't mind seeing another "if it involves this cruel, sadistic, cannibalistic business."


Most Popular Stories
  • EDITORIAL: Stood her ground
  • LETTERS: A moral obligation to not bankrupt the country
  • VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: 'Allowed' to carry for self-defense
  • LETTERS: Nursery did the right thing with laborers
  • EDITORIAL: Numbers stink?
  • LETTERS: Teachers not most important learning variable
  • EDITORIAL: Gotta have faith
  • EDITORIAL: Clunk, clunk
  • LETTERS: Put aside re-election interests for nation's good
  • EDITORIAL: Election results




  • The gentleman from West Virginia got pretty worked up over the whole thing. "How inhuman! How dastardly!" bellowed the senator.

    But wait. There's more! "Barbaric!" he yelled. "Let that word resound from hill to hill, and from mountain to mountain, and valley to valley across the broad land. Barbaric! Barbaric! May God help those poor souls who'd be so cruel. Barbaric! Hear me! Barbaric!"

    But the 89-year old dean of the Senate wasn't done. He graciously offered that he would not prejudge a man's guilt or innocence on the barbaric actions which instigated his ire, but he left no doubts about his sentiments.

    "I am confident that the hottest places in hell are reserved for the souls of sick and brutal people who hold God's creatures in such brutal and cruel contempt," he said.

    In his never-ending quest not to be outdone by a demagogic colleague, would-be President John Kerry wrote a letter describing this as "one of society's most barbaric and inhumane activities."

    CNN host Nancy Grace called it "murder" and compared the perpetrator to O.J. Simpson.

    What heinous act has these -- and millions of other compassionate lovers and defenders of life -- so outraged? Could they possibly be expressing their condemnation to those physicians who swore an oath to honor and protect life, yet abort millions of viable young lives in utero every year? Could these esteemed leaders be acknowledging that the brutal procedure known as partial-birth abortion is indeed a sadistic and barbaric mistreatment of God's greatest gift -- human life?

    Sadly, no. These men and women, and millions others like them, get more worked up over the admittedly brutal and inhumane treatment of soulless dogs, as evidenced by their public proclamations in the Michael Vick case.

    Nancy Grace pointed out on her program, over video of two dogs annihilating each other, that the dogs "can't defend themselves." I'm confident Ms. Grace has never shown video of a partial-birth abortion procedure, and I'm relatively confident she has somehow failed to acknowledge that the unborn children are even more defenseless, but she's outraged over this nevertheless. If only they and their animal-rights allies would acknowledge the more precious worth of human life.

    (I must note that Sen. Byrd has voted for a ban on partial-birth abortions, but I wonder if he debated in favor of human life with the passion he showed for Vick's canines.)

    Please don't misunderstand me. I love dogs. There is no doubt the crime for which Michael Vick has been charged is brutal and inhumane, to say the least. But I fear our culture has degenerated to a level where our priorities are so out of whack, that we decry "from mountain to mountain and valley to valley" the mistreatment of innocent animals, while we turn a collective and legislative blind eye to the premature and yes, barbaric killing of human life in the name of "choice."

    What's wrong with this picture?

    I am in no way defending Vick, an NFL quarterback, for his off-field enterprises. If the allegations are true, and this happened on his property under his watch, the man clearly should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

    Vick has had several run-ins with authorities and fans over the past several years. At one point, you heard him say he's just "one of the boys." It's time for him to rise above the level of a boy, and raise the standard of maturity and responsibility for his "boys" to live up to.

    Like it or not, being a high school, college and NFL superstar making millions of dollars a year brings with it some responsibility. And as any leader knows, the burden of leadership can sometimes be heavy. Unfortunately, Vick has fumbled the ball.

    I've been a dog owner, and I must say I got attached to my critter. I'm not amused by or defensive of the accusations against Vick and his "boys."

    But once -- just once -- I'd like to hear the John Kerrys, Nancy Graces and PETA supporters of the world weep over the brutal and barbaric taking of human life that they call "choice."

    Absent that, I weep for them and for our culture.

    J.C. Watts (JCWatts01@jcwatts.com), chairman of J.C. Watts Companies, a business consulting group, is former chairman of the Republican Conference of the U.S. House, where he served as an Oklahoma representative from 1995 to 2002. He writes twice monthly for the Review-Journal.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 63 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Report abuse

    Rebecca wrote on July 14, 2009 01:30 PM: Dear Mr Watts,
    We miss you in Washington. I heard you speak on several occasions and I thought you should run for President.
    I am sure that you are feeling like many of us out here in the land of the free. I am personally so upset with both the Dems and Republicans. No one is listening to our pleas for restraint.
    It sounds like you are very busy now and I am so glad that you are so sucessful.
    Congratulations from a friend in Arizona.
    Sincerely,
    Rebecca A Spann


    Report abuse

    Marylou Anderson wrote on June 06, 2008 03:56 PM: Good article! JC FOR VP!!!!!


    Report abuse

    Miss Toni wrote on May 11, 2008 09:13 PM: You said it! God knows I love animals. Our pets are members of our family. But it defies common sense and decency to think that a pre-born person, with his own circulation system, brain activity, etc., lacking nothing more than time and nourishment to come to full term can be considered anything less than a BABY! Far more precious than puppies, kittens or baby seals - as cute as they are. The difference is whether or not they are wanted. If so, then, "she's having a baby." If not, then it's tissue or a fetus or some other way to mask the truth; IT'S A BABY. A HUMAN BABY!
    When will the sleeping giant awake and put an end to this tragedy?! When we we leap to the defense of the defenseless - with at least as much passion as the PETA crowd?
    Many aborted babies could have lived outside the womb given new technology and medical advances!
    I realized that a fetus was an independent person using just my common sense when we did blood typing in 9th grade biology. My mom had Type O and I have A+. I didn't change to A+ at birth, so it stands to reason that I have been A+ since conception with a separate blood type and circulation system in utero. Hello? What does THAT tell you?
    And along those lines, where are the Women's Rights groups when girl fetuses are being selectively aborted? What's up with preventing birth defects by aborting "defective" babies? Where are all the advocacy groups then?
    WAKE UP, AMERICA! This is a tragedy of epic proportions! J.C. and other conservative leaders are voices crying in the wilderness. It's time we joined the chorus!


    Report abuse

    Cesar Sastre wrote on April 09, 2008 03:49 AM: Ditto, ditto, ditto...
    J.C. hits the nail right on the head in this column. How far have we as a people come, when we value the life of an animal over the life of a baby that is not yet born?
    I am often perplexed when I see and hear those who claim to care about the "little guy", and yet have done absolutely nothing to help the littlest of all little guys. Worse, many of these same people are out there hurting the littlest of the little guy in the name of a women's right to choose to exterminate an inconvenience.
    As long as we continue to view unborn babies and born babies as an inconvenience or as one presidential recently put it, a "punishment", we will continue to see the decline of the moral fabric of this country as we continue to give less and less value to human life.
    This issue has many more implications that simply avoiding an unwanted pregnancy.
    Thank you, J.C. for standing up for the "little guy". When will you run for president?


    Report abuse

    lonnie malouff wrote on February 03, 2008 12:24 PM: so glad to see your dogfighting article. always supported your politics
    and glad to see you voicing for the unborn again. God bless you


    Report abuse

    Judge Peter Hill wrote on November 04, 2007 11:05 AM: A restraint oriented Judge's point of view: Wade vs Roe, the U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion in 1973, was wrong not because it was pro-choice, but because the Court was saying that states could not decide for themselves. To put that another way, it would have been equally wrong (although pro-lifers would support such a theoretical ruling) for the Court to have said that states could not allow abortion on the grounds that it is unconstitutional murder. Judicial Activism refers to the practice of a Court or a Judge to make or redefine law or to in any way interpret the Constitution or any law as he/she wants to, even if it is contrary to the original intent of those who made the Constitution or law. Judicial Restraint, which is what I believe and practice, refers to the practice of a Court or a Judge to interpret the Constitution or a law as the framers intended it to be interpreted, even if it is contrary to the Court or Judge's personal beliefs. The steady decline of morality and common sense in the U.S. today is the direct result of special interest groups appointing Activist Judges to the Courts because they are not getting what they want through the Legislatures, hence the overall destructivness of Judicial Activism to further the one law they want. The solution is to appoint Restraint oriented Judges and leave making and defining or redefining law where it Constitutionally belongs: in the Legislative and Executive branches of Government.


    Report abuse

    Ryan Sullivan wrote on September 18, 2007 10:08 AM: Hi Mr. Watts I'm a senior at Rancocas Valley Regional High School in Mount Holly, New Jersey.I was wondering if u would mind answering some questions for my senior research project? My topic is about the cruelty dog fighting.


    Report abuse

    steve o wrote on September 16, 2007 07:19 PM: sure it's BARBARIC and we make life and death choices every single day..........deer hunting is BARBARIC TOO, JC.....what's sad is that the RIGHT TO LIFE FOLKS deal in ABSOLUTES which they DEFINE, instead of reducing the number of abortions thru education, contraception, and adoption, The RIGHT TO LIFE CROWD has completely missed the boat.............


    Report abuse

    Kathy wrote on September 03, 2007 08:39 AM: Well Joe (first Joe) is certainly a left wing hypocrite. Seems to be ok for the politicians on capital hill to have their opinion but no one else having one if it doesn't agree with them. One sided, just like the abortion issue. You have the right to choose as long as the choice is death of the baby. I appreciate J.C. Watts' common sense, not afraid of being politically incorrect.


    Report abuse

    Joe wrote on August 30, 2007 12:05 PM: For just once I would so appreciate hearing remarks and personal views of our elected officials be left to just that, a statement of their opinions.
    But, always, we have to hear form the other parties feeble attenpts to turn all things into a political 'footbal', as in the case of Mr. Watts. Why any person would take as sad an action as Mr. Vicks personal choice to torture animals, and turn it inot a political issue is within itself a sad commentary on people in general, let alone a former member of congress. He learned well during his tenure in our capital, a sad event also.


    Read All Comments