In her view, most find abortion to be a serious sin but are not sure they want to criminalize women who seek one.Truth to tell, I would like to see Senator Biden give a speech on his Catholic faith and practice."And there is an ambivalence about obedience and authority," she said. "If we're told how to vote, we turn off pretty quickly."
Because Biden's faith is so important to him and because bishops may continue to criticize him, Dallaville says, Biden could benefit by giving a major speech on his faith, as Obama did when he severed ties with Jeremiah Wright.
"Joe Biden has a rich story to tell and maybe that would put him out in front of the criticism," she said.
Perhaps he'll revisit his Meet The Press appeal to "debates about life, you know, from, from “Summa Theologica,” Aquinas, and 40 days to quickening and right to, you know, you know, Pious [sic] IX, animated fetus doctrine and so on" -- a strategy recently adopted by Nancy Pelosi to disasterous effects. At the very least, it may provide another "teachable moment."
The article also features Chris Korzen of the self-proclaimed "non-partisan" Catholics United [shortened from "Catholics United for the Common Good"] -- who praises Biden's interest in "social justice" and -- in another by now familiar tactic -- dismisses Catholic concern over adherence to Church teaching on abortion as politically-divisive:
[Korzen] also says some bishops will use abortion as a wedge issue and will do it in an acrimonious way, which he regrets."As Catholics, we should be thinking about how we treat each other when we talk about our faith," said Korzen, co-author of the book "A Nation for All: How the Catholic Vision of the Common Good Can Save America from the Politics of Division."
He's also encouraged that Democrats have been talking about wanting to reduce the number of abortions and hopes Republicans will broaden their anti-abortion concerns to include issuses such as health care, jobs and global warming.
"Abortion is not the only thing we care about," he said.
Cardinal George of Chicago may be one such bishop preoccupied with so-called "wedge issues". This week he released a forceful statement on the matter of abortion specifically in relation to the much-touted Catholic concern for "the common good":The Catholic Church, from its first days, condemned the aborting of unborn children as gravely sinful. Not only Scripture’s teaching about God’s protection of life in the womb (consider the prophets and the psalms and the Gospel stories about John the Baptist and Jesus himself in Mary’s womb) but also the first century catechism (the Didache or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles) said: “You shall not slay the child by abortions. You shall not kill what is generated.” The teaching of the Church was clear in a Roman Empire that permitted abortion. This same teaching has been constantly reiterated in every place and time up to Vatican II, which condemned abortion as a “heinous crime.” This is true today and will be so tomorrow. Any other comments, by politicians, professors, pundits or the occasional priest, are erroneous and cannot be proposed in good faith.As Cardinal George reminds us, the Catholic Church does not endorse this or that political candidate. On the other hand, "she does teach the principles according to which Catholics should form their social consciences."This teaching has consequences for those charged with caring for the common good, those who hold public office. The unborn child, who is alive and is a member of the human family, cannot defend himself or herself. Good law defends the defenseless. Our present laws permit unborn children to be privately killed. Laws that place unborn children outside the protection of law destroy both the children killed and the common good, which is the controlling principle of Catholic social teaching. One cannot favor the legal status quo on abortion and also be working for the common good.
The News-Journal's article closes with a Delaware voter's praise of Senator Biden for his "consistent" adherence to his position on abortion. "She says his position is much the same today: He's personally opposed to abortion but supports a woman's right to choose." Consistently held, perhaps -- but intellectually and morally wanting.







5 comments:
In her view, most find abortion to be a serious sin but are not sure they want to criminalize women who seek one. That's a common deception. AFAIK, in the USA in those places when/where abortion was a crime, it was the abortionist who committed the crime, not the mother. Nor do I know of anybody proposing to re-criminalize abortion who wants to throw mothers into jail.
Well said elc. It's another example of a smokescreen I've heard called the "where is your comprehensive legal formula" canard. That is, unless pro-lifers produce every jot and title of how abortion laws would work, then we shouldn't talk about making it illegal. It's absurd. All laws present difficulties in implementation, enforcement, and punishment. While criminalizing abortion may be problematic, there is nothing uniquely problematic about it. But as a brief and broad sketch, the woman would likely never see jail time, perhaps community service. Anyone who pressured her into an abortion like a boyfriend or relative (almost forgot those people, didn't ya abortion fans?) would get a a harsher punishment, and the person performing the abortion would get hard jail time and loss of any medical license (no problem there as abortionist doctors tend to be the bottom of the barrel anyway).
Then of course we can expect to get the well-it-just-goes-to-the-states-then, or the massive-flight-to-Canada-and-Mexico objections. But so what? No one said criminalizing abortion would be easy, but neither was abolishing slavery. But we can sure be thankful to the people that did the hard work to eliminate it.
Oh, yes, Scott. Just like the drug wars! Let's build thousands more prisons to house the doctors, and the husbands, and the wives, and the teenagers. Abortions will never be stopped here or anywhere else in the world. Since Catholics don't allow birth control, you have no argument whatsover.
Oh, yes, Scott. Just like the drug wars! Let's build thousands more prisons to house the doctors, and the husbands, and the wives, and the teenagers.
But this doesn't mitigate what I've said. ALL laws have these problems, but that doesn't excuse keeping evil acts legal.
Abortions will never be stopped here or anywhere else in the world.
If doctors realized they were facing jail time and loss of license, it is resonable to conjecture that much of abortion would fizzle. It would still exist on the fringe. But that is precisely where evil acts belong.
Since Catholics don't allow birth control, you have no argument whatsover.
This sounds remarkable similar to the discussion I had earlier with another anonymous poster. The problem was, that person didn't think abortion was objectively evil, which made his/her touting of contraception one big rabbit trail. That is, if we accept the erroneous proposition that abortion is not objectively evil, then there is no reason to speak of "reducing them" via contraception. Bottom line: Both contraception and abortion are objectively evil, and it is not permissible to do one evil to prevent another.
That is, if we accept the erroneous proposition that abortion is not objectively evil, then there is no reason to speak of "reducing them" via contraception.
Well said, Scott. Bravo.
Post a Comment