It seems to me that a Catholic (or a Mohammendan or a Presbyterian, for that matter) in this republic who believes (or is told by a religious authority) that his duty as a citizen violates his religious principles must choose which duty to obey. If he cannot in good conscience obey his civic duty, he must perforce resign office (if his violation of religious duty was occasioned by the requirements of office) and (if the civic duty is one required of all citizens) accept the punishment of the state. Religious conscientious objectors to military service are an example, they either perform alternative service or accept state sanction for refusal of their duties.
I think you've stated that well. However, one could debate whether a citizen's "civic duty" is to the Constitution, or to some howling-moonbat judge's distortion of the Constitution ... to the law, or or to a judge who puts himself above the statutes.
However we look at this point, the fact remains that it has never been easy to be faithful to Christ within a non-Christian society. This shouldn't surprise us - He promised us that it wouldn't be easy, but that "our reward is great in Heaven" if we "love not our lives, unto death."
You make a good point for discussion here. Surely the #1 duty must be to exert all of one's powers to get the unjust law changed. If it passes, you must make every effort to make sure it doesn't require any cooperation from you; you must try to secure some legally-recognized conscientious-objector status.
If you can't do that, you may have to resign your job (as Thomas More resigned his Chancellorship undr Henry VIII.) If they won't let you resign, or if the evil is required of you as a subject or a citizen, I guess you have to face penalty, prison, martyrdom.
But here's two questions: are there any circumstances where either refusal to comply (without resigning your job) or covert sabotage, are either allowed or required?
I'd like to hear some opinions here, preferably with historic illustrations. I seem to remember Norwegian schoolteachers under the Quisling regime, openly refusing to teach a Nazi curriculum in their schools?
"If he cannot in good conscience obey his civic duty, he must perforce resign office"
Why isn't it his civic duty (a crafty way to phrase it)to do as he sees right? The source of a mans morality and belief does not disqualify him from participation in government. Democratic structurs give people recourse when they disagree with the law. When they do not then they are totalitarian.