Posted on 07/31/2004 1:28:39 PM PDT by Mark Noonan
At the Democratic Convention, John Kerry did not mention the issue of abortion; not even the ritualistic "protect a woman's right to choose". This has been a staple of Democratic Presidential politics since 1984 - why drop it after 20 years? Is it because the pro-abortion advocates feel comfortable with both candidates and thus aren't worried one way or the other? Hardly.
After at NARAL-Pro Choice America, their "Election 2000" coverage really only hits upon two themes - stop the "anti-choice" President Bush and help the "pro-choice" John Kerry. By looking at the way NARAL approaches the issue of abortion, its clear that their main chosen battlefield is in the realm of judicial appointments. Their stated opposition to President Bush goes thusly:
"President Bush is likely to have the opportunity to replace at least one, if not more, of the justices who continue to uphold Roe's basic principles. President Bush opposes the freedom to choose."
Why judges? After all, judges only enforce law, and thus the real battle is with those who make and enact law - ie, the Congress and the President. Therein lies the problem for NARAL; their interpretation of a right to choose is not the same as most people's, and thus they know the legislative route of protecting legal abortion is pretty much a non-starter; the courts are their only hope and so how Kerry and President Bush make their judicial nominations is central.
John Kerry, as we all know, is a Catholic - not only a Catholic, but a Catholic who claims he believes that life begins at conception. Generally, those who so hold are anti-abortion (yours truly included); if life begins at conception, then no one has a right to end that life without just cause - and because someone who is pregnant subsequently "chooses" not to have a baby is, in the view of such people, insufficient cause. So, what are we to make of Kerry?
It seems to me that he's trying to have his cake and eat it, too; to both keep his Catholic bona-fides, while at the same time lock down the very well-funded and well-connnected pro-abortion minority on election day. The NARAL people apparantly know how the game is played, because they are all over supporting Kerry for the President as the "pro-choice" candidate - they know that Kerry's stated opinions wont matter in the least; if he wins, then come nominating time, there wont be a judicial nominee sent up who does not meet the requirements of NARAL (which, boiled down, is abortion on demand).
Kerry has had to try this bit of "nuance" in order to get past the growing desire on the part of the Catholic Church to have those who claim the mantle of Catholic to adhere to Catholic teaching - you know, either be Catholic, or don't be Catholic; but don't claim to be Catholic and then go out and advocate non-Catholic things. Supporting abortion on demand and claiming to be Catholic is akin to claiming Judaism and then opening up a ham and cheese sandwich stand. Kerry is afraid that if he doesn't at least bob and weave enough on the issue to give the Catholic authorities some wiggle room, he might be booted out of the Church, thus costing him the votes of those Catholics (about 40 million of the 65 million Catholics in the United States) who really take their Catholicism seriously. Gore just barely won the support of these Catholics in 2000 (I believe by 52 to 48%; Catholics have long been supporters of the Democratic Party, but such support has declined steadily since the 1960's), and without a repeat of Gore's numbers Kerry is toast in such battleground States as Michigan and Pennsylvania, which have large and devout Catholic communities.
The Catholic Church catches a lot of flack these days; to read the secular media is to read about everything, real and imagined, that is wrong with the Catholic Church. The only socially acceptable bigotry in the United States is anti-Catholic bigotry. The entertainment industry does backflips to avoid offending anyone (mostly in the name of profits, it goes without saying - non-offended people are likely to tune in), but if someone wants to work a bit of anti-Catholic bigotry into a movie, book, play, song, TV show or what have you, the entertainment industry somehow looks upon the bigotry as some sort of heroic act against the oppressor. But the influence of the 2,000 year old faith is still there - in the United States in the form of the tens of millions of people who hold to the faith.
The reality of this influence is why John Kerry is flip-flopping like mad on the issue of abortion, and its why NARAL doesn't really even bother trying to elect pro-abortion legislators and concentrates all its efforts on getting one man into a position of power wherein he can appoint people who will judicially enforce NARAL's narrow-minded and distinctly minority viewpoint. The reality of this influence is also why the Catholic Church is under assault. The reality of this influence is why, in the end, Catholics must support George Bush for re-election; the judges a Kerry presidency would appoint are not only likely to adhere rigidly to NARAL's pro-abortion doctrine, but they are also likely to enforce other odd notions - such as that Catholic businesses must provide benefits to non-married couples, that Catholic hospitals must dispense abortion and birth control, that a Catholic priest giving a sermon stating that homosexual sex is a sin is guilty of a hate crime.
In John Kerry's America, religious faith would only be allowed as a sort of museum piece; something which you are permitted to have, but not permitted to act upon. After all, NARAL is perfectly ok with Kerry's brand of Catholicism, because Kerry wont actually go and do anything Catholic - but these tiny elites are not just opposed to believing Catholics; they also don't have much love for believing protestants, believing Jews...anyone who believes in a higher power providing order and justice in the universe is allowed to live (for now, at least), but they are not allowed to bring their views to the public square.
In President Bush's America, its the faith in God shared by at least 80% of the American people (even as they differ on some of the precise attributes of God and religious beliefs) which makes us a great nation. President Bush is not just a man who believes in his Christian faith, he acts upon it. We know where he's coming from; we can judge where he will go in a given set of circumstances because he makes no bones about what he believes and he acts upon them. Furthermore, President Bush isn't afraid of people who believe differently from him - he doesn't demand I mute my Catholicism because he views things differently on some matters; no, he instead says "we've got this much in common, what may we build together?".
This is the choice we have; and being a man of faith (however imperfect), I cannot believe other than that at the end of the day, President Bush will be re-elected.
No, John Kerry, as most of us know, is a Catholic In Name Only - CINO.
Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Catholic Discussion Ping List.
"Supporting abortion on demand and claiming to be Catholic is akin to claiming Judaism and then opening up a ham and cheese sandwich stand."
That's a terrible sentence and hardly an analogy. Could use some rethinking.
Kerry claims that he is a Catholic. I assume that he believes (as do all believing Catholics) that there is a soul, and that it is infused at the moment of conception. (If so, then the "personhood" that he speaks of must be created at that point [conception].)
Therefore, he must agree that ANY abortion is murder.
John Kerry is the clearest danger to Catholic values since the "Know Nothings" of the 19th century. When he talks about Catholic issues, he is lying about everything he says.
He assumes you and I are stupid.
At catholicsagainstkerry.com we are fighting back. We are not waiting for history to happen to us, we are making history.
Visit our site. Become part of us. Learn what it is like to be a genuine Catholic. Live up to your Confirmation vows.
I have bookmarked your site.
We have to get out the word that Kerry is not a true Catholic. The Democrat seminar letter-writers are out there in force writing to all the hometown papers, touting Kerry as pro-family.
Every time I see one of these lying letters to the editor, I write and point out Kerry's pro-abortion voting record; his votes against the Laci and Conner Bill; and his advocacy of stem cell experiments on embryos.
Thanks for the heads-up; I'm with you, now.
You really think it wasn't a good analogy? I was trying for something which was obvious without getting to gruesome...on the cutting room floor are worse analogies. I'll try to do better next time.
No problem. It's a tough issue. I think a Catholic beng for abortion is more like someone who is Jewish being for the Nazis. That's the closer analogy. But we get the point.
No problem. It's a tough issue. I think a Catholic beng for abortion is more like someone who is Jewish being for the Nazis. That's the closer analogy. But we get the point.
I would say that Kerry already has lost the support of "those Catholics who really take their Catholicism seriously." His "Catholic" supporters are more the cafeteria Catholics who want to pick and choose. As for the analogy, in my opinion it wasn't strong enough simply because I don't think the Jewish faith considers violation of kosher requirements to be murder (I have only the very vaguest idea of the theological basis for the dietary requirements so I hope I'm not misstating anything here). There are also, I believe, several branches of Judaism with varying requirements. I just don't think the analogy goes far enough. The key point is that the Catholic church considers abortion to be murder. To understand the Catholic position, just substitute "murder" for "abortion" in any argument, i.e., "I don't condone murder, but I am not going to impose my views on anyone else," "the legal question has been settled that women have a right to murder"... etc. I believe that part of the problem is an idea that opposition to abortion is based on some complex point of Catholic theology (like kosher diet is to a non-Jewish person-- it's difficult to understand if you haven't studied it). The Catholic church's opposition to abortion is based on its opposition to murder. When Kerry supports abortion, he supports murder. You don't get to do that just because you were an altar boy or because you carried a rosary in Vietnam.
This reply is to everyone here! I take a similar position to Kerry on first trimester abortion (though I support a ban on late-term abortion and support parental notifications and waiting periods, unlike Kerry); I am also a practicing Catholic. First of all, for anyone to make the claim that one cannot be pro-choice and Catholic is to make a claim that the Pope himself would not make (and has not!). Clearly, the Church believes itself to be correct on this issue, and affirms its position as objectively true. Nonetheless, there is no precedent in Canon Law for denying Communion to someone on the basis of dissenting from the Church on abortion *and of course, I assume that everyone here affirms the Church's teaching on the death penalty.* It is true that having an abortion carries the penalty of automatic excommunication; but Catholics are free to personally dissent from the Church's teaching on this issue. When non-Catholics convert, they are not asked to accept the Church's position on abortion as infallible; they are asked only to affirm the fundamentals of the faith found in the Creed, and renounce the works of Satan. Conservative Catholics may affirm that abortion is a work of Satan--and that may be true--but nowhere does the Church teach that this is specifically understood to be included in that renunciation. My biggest problem with John Kerry--and most pro-choice Catholics--is that they are actually pro-abortion. I think first-trimester abortion should be legal, because I do not believe it is a person until viability, though it is clearly a life, in the biological sense. However, I work to support programs that promote abortion alternatives--because I genuinely want to see abortion rare. The question I wish more Catholics would be asking is--okay, so you say want abortion to be rare (as Clinton said, "safe, legal, and rare")--what are you doing to try and help make it less common?!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.