Dr. Stephen Schneck interviewed on "The World Over"


No offense, but does anyone here on Catholic Answers Forums think that Michael Voris is going to call out Dr. Schneck sooner or later on The Vortex?

I watched it the other day. What kind of gymanstic reasoning that Obama is more pro life than Romney/Ryan

This video makes a good response

Pro-Life Democrats are Patsies


I watched it the other day. What kind of gymanstic reasoning that Obama is more pro life than Romney/Ryan

This video makes a good response

Pro-Life Democrats are Patsies


Catholic Professor Claims Obama Pro-Life, Deserves Re-Election

In recent election cycles, Democrats have made a series of ham-handed attempts to convince voters that they would actually do a better job lowering abortion rates than Republicans have.

In 2004, Sojourners ran an article by Glen Harold Stassen which used data from a sample of states to claim the abortion rate went up under President Bush. However, comprehensive data later released by the CDC revealed the abortion rate actually fell during President Bush’s first term in office.

In 2008, Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good (CACG) released a study which purportedly found that welfare spending was effective at lowering abortion rates. However, after a data-coding error was corrected, the results indicated that welfare spending had inconsistent effects across time.

This year is appears that Stephen Schneck will be taking on this role for the Democratic party. Schneck used to be the chair of the Department of Politics at Catholic University of America. He is currently director of CUA’s Institute for Policy Research and Catholic Studies and is associated with the group Catholics for Obama. At a panel hosted by Democrats for Life on Wednesday, Schneck attempted to make the case Stassen and CACG tried to make in 2004 and 2008 respectively. [Editor’s Note: [URL=“http://www.cua.edu/contact-us.cfm”]You can contact CUA here

to complain.]

However, based on his Wednesday remarks, it does not appear he will be any more successful than his predecessors.

Schneck’s main argument is that since one-third of all births are paid for by Medicaid and the Romney-Ryan ticket wants to cut Medicaid — women who would have used Medicaid to pay their childbearing expenses will instead obtain abortions. There are obviously lots of problems with this logic. Schneck cites no research which shows that Medicaid spending is negatively correlated with abortion rates. There is also no evidence that women respond to higher childbearing costs by obtaining abortions in greater numbers. There is no guarantee that any Medicaid cuts would be focused on prenatal or perinatal care.

Medicaid is jointly run by the states and federal government and states could respond to federal cuts by increasing spending. Finally, past Republican efforts to cut spending have not always met with much success and there is no guarantee a President Romney would actually be able to cut Medicaid.

In the past, a number of Democrats have tried to make the case that social spending will reduce abortion rates. However, there is not one peer-reviewed study which shows that Medicaid spending or any other kind of welfare spending actually reduces the incidence of abortion.

There is, however, a substantial body of research which documents the effectiveness of pro-life laws. In 2009 the Guttmacher Institute did a literature review on public-funding restrictions for abortion. Of the 24 studies they considered, 20 found that abortion rates fell after public funding was reduced. They even acknowledged the best research indicates that restricting public funding lowers abortion rates. There is also an academic literature which documents the effectiveness of parental-involvement laws and properly designed informed-consent laws.


I was shaking my head through that entire interview. I have never seen such a devastating lack of coherent thought and logic in my life. I must say I find it saddening when a newscaster is better schooled in not only logic but politics, current events and his faith than a Ph.D who leads a political organization AND holds tenure at a Catholic university. Not that Raymond Arroyo shouldn’t be well versed in those things, as he clearly is, but what is Dr. Schneck’s excuse?

I could only take so much of the verbal gymnastics from Dr. Schneck’s, so I heard him
at three different times ( I dvd the program each week) before I heard the whole interview.
(Sigh) I wonder how many students he has influenced in his position?:eek:

Please remember that discussions of political parties or candidates are not allowed in the Social Justice forum. Thank you for your cooperation.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.