Posted on 10/14/2007 4:21:04 PM PDT by cpforlife.org
The recent articles regarding Hillary Clinton have been quite popular. I am following up with a series of interviews with friend, colleague and presidential historian Paul Kengor regarding the role of faith and social policy in the upcoming election. This interview presents Paul’s take on the religious views of front-runners Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani, specifically with regard to abortion policy. Would Rudy be denied communion? Does Hillary think of abortion as a kind of sacred right? Read on…
THROCKMORTON: Just a basic question for foundation: Why do you believe that the religious views of politicians are relevant to their campaign for the presidency?
KENGOR: To quote FDR, the presidency is preeminently a place of moral leadership, and religion is the foundation of morality. George Washington noted that religion and morality are the “indispensable supports” of a successful democratic republic. There is no such thing as a legislator or policy-maker who leaves morality out of his or her decision making. All of our figures impose some kind of personal morality, whether flawed or not. Religion is usually the basis for that morality, and, in American history, typically the Christian religion.
Presidential candidates often point to their faith as justification for the policies they promote during their campaigns.
I believe, the scandal is when you have a liberal Democrat like John Kerry who stated in the final 2004 presidential debate, “My faith affects everything I do, really,” and then cites how his faith influences his desire to end poverty, to clean up the environment, to hike the minimum wage, but then, suddenly, completely separates his Roman Catholic faith from life-death issues like abortion and embryonic research. In my view, that’s outrageous. Kerry does it, Mario Cuomo does it, Ted Kennedy does it, and, most recently, from the Republican side of the aisle, Rudy Giuliani is doing it.
THROCKMORTON: Your new book examines the religious views of the current democratic front runner, Hillary Clinton. How about the Republican leader, Rudy Giuliani? What is his religious background?
KENGOR: He says that he studied theology for four years in college, after completing 12 years at a Catholic private school. By studying theology, I think he means that he was probably required to take some religious education courses at Manhattan College, which was the Catholic college that he attended, where I believe he studied politics and philosophy. He says that at one point he considered becoming a priest.
THROCKMORTON: What are his current religious leanings and how will these impact his policy making?
KENGOR: He has been quite private about that, knowing that any mention of his faith will get him in hot water as the first major pro-choice Republican with a legitimate crack at winning the party’s presidential nomination. The Republican Party has become the Party of Life, and nominating Rudy might well change that image. There are numerous pro-life Christians, Protestant and Catholic, who are going to fight that possible shift, from the likes of James Dobson at Focus on the Family to the pages of the National Catholic Register. They are not pleased that after all of these pro-life gains that have come only because of Republican presidents fighting abortion extermists in the Democratic Party, there is a sudden chance of a course reversal under a Republican president named Rudy Giuliani, no matter what his guarantees about appointing “strict constructionist” judges. They understand that in the real world there will be an untold number of pro-abortion executive orders and initiatives and decisions that would come across a President Giuliani’s desk, and that concerns them. As president, he might at best get to appoint two Supreme Court justices, but he will constantly be dealing with a flurry of pro-life and anti-life legislation.
THROCKMORTON: I have heard Mr. Giuliani say, I hate abortion. How does he reconcile this statement and his Catholic affiliation with his abortion public policy?
KENGOR: Hopefully, everyone hates abortion. The burning question in response would be to ask him why he hates abortion. Naturally, one would presume, he would say that he hates abortion because it terminates a human life. That being the case, how can one support the termination of human life? Once he concedes that point, he knows he’s in trouble. His church is very clear on this, from encyclicals like Humanae Vitae to Evangelium Vitae to Veritatis Splendor to the Catechism to the very recent eloquent remarks from Pope Benedict XVI.
Imagine this striking scenario: a Catholic president of the United States who is denied Holy Communion in certain dioceses because of his stance on abortion. That would be truly remarkable.
Non-Catholics have trouble understanding this, so let me try to explain Catholic thinking: Catholics believe that at Holy Communion they receive the literal body and blood of Christ. The recent Vatican document Redemptionis Sacramentum affirms Church teaching that “anyone who is conscious of grave sin should not celebrate or receive the Body of the Lord without prior sacramental confession.” The document restated the church’s position that anyone knowingly in “grave sin” must go to confession before ingesting the consecrated bread and wine that Catholics consider the literal body and blood of Jesus Christ. Cardinal Francis Arinze said that “unambiguously pro-abortion” Catholic politicians are “not fit” to receive the sacred elements.The Vatican has spoken on this. It is up to American bishops to decide whether to carry out the policy.
In 2004, a number of Catholic archbishops suggested or flatly stated that if a President John Kerry presented himself for communion in their diocese he would be turned away. Among others, these included Archbishop Raymond L. Burke of St. Louis, Archbishop Alfred C. Hughes of New Orleans, and even Archbishop Sean O’Malley of Boston—Kerry’s home diocese. Most recently, in Giuliani’s case, Archbishop Burke has spoken up.
THROCKMORTON: Compared to Hillary Clinton, who would be most pro-choice, if such a comparison can be made?
KENGOR: That’s a no-brainer: Hillary Clinton. If you’re a pro-lifer, and if no issue is more important to you than the right of an unborn child to have life, then nothing could be more calamitous than a President Hillary Clinton. I don’t know of any politician who is more uncompromising and extreme on abortion rights than Hillary Clinton. I know this well and don’t state it with anger or hyperbole. Her extremism on abortion rights was the single most shocking, inexplicable find in my research on her faith and politics. I couldn’t understand it. No question. It is truly extraordinary. Nothing, no political issue, impassions her like abortion rights. For Mrs. Clinton, abortion-rights is sacred ground.
By the way, speaking of Catholics, Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul II saw this abortion extremism in Hillary, and both confronted her on it repeatedly, especially Mother Teresa, right up until the day she died. I have a chapter on this in the book. It’s a gripping story.
THROCKMORTON: Of Hillary and Rudy, who would most likely make abortion rights a litmus test for Supreme Court appointments?
KENGOR: Hillary, no question. She has made that clear. Rudy would not.
I’ll take a pragmatist over a socialist any day.
Republicans are their own worst enemy. Jeesh!
There is no dilemma for me. If Rudy gets the nomination, I will be up on Election Day at 5am to walk over broken glass, barbed wire, fire ants, and killer bees to vote for him against Hillary.
Hillary will destroy this country, Even Gary Bauer warned conservatives on Sean Hannity, those conservatives that think that Hillary will be another Cartesque election bounty, that if Hillary gets the White House, it could be decade before the damaged caused by HRC presidency is rectified, if we have a country. Not years, not election cycles, but decades.
Would be great... but that’s not looking very probable, especially on the Senate side where federal judges get confirmed.
But we do have a serious dilemma if it’s these two demons in the general.
If you won’t vote for either Jim what will you do?
I wouldn’t waste my vote on either one. The winner would claim a mandate. I will look elsewhere. If you don’t vote for someone you agree with, your position will never be known. Stand up and be counted - vote for life. Maybe in 2012, life will be respected.
You ever hear the saying “Fool me once......”?
If Rudy is the rep nominee I’ll stay home ... I cannot take part in a sham of an election, and I will never have to say “I voted for him”.
KENGOR: Hillary, no question. She has made that clear. Rudy would not.
The Supreme Court is not the proper place for this battle. Although the SC "legalized" abortion, it is only because the legislative branch has abdicated it's power to the SC on this issue. To make abortion illegal, we must change the law. Either US law, or the US Constitution.
Trying to get the SC to outlaw abortion, by selecting presidents who will select jurists for that purpose, is an ineffective and detrimental means to accomplish the ends. It even sounds ridiculous. There is just too much uncertainty in the effort. Who will the president pick? Which current justice will he be replacing? Will the justice actually vote to make abortion illegal? Will following presidents simply place justices that will make abortion legal again? Even if the SC make abortion illegal, will state law trump federal law? And so on.
Anti-abortion efforts need to be refocused onto legislative action. Out of the 3 federal branches, the executive has the least amount of power to make abortion illegal. And yet, we keep banging our heads against the wall, and the unborn are still being slaughtered. No doubt, Hillary and the Rats would like us to continue with the existing strategy.
With abortion out of the equation, the choice between any Republican and Hillary should be decisively for the Republican candidate due to issues the president can be most effective at, namely, national security, the justice system, the economy, and freedom!
I take that back , I’d write in Keyes so Rudy and the RINO’s would know why they lost in a landslide.
I’ll pray that the majority of our pro-life conservative leaders, senators, congressmen, governors, statesmen, commentators, grassroots groups, etc, vociferously condemn the culture of death abortionists, resign from the Republican party and form a new pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Liberty, pro-America conservative party and offer us a real choice between evil socialism and righteous freedom.
First off I don’t trust that’s Rudy’s real position, I think it’s his public strategic way of looking less evil than he really is. IIRC he said he’s fine with Roe staying the way it is-—IOW he could care less if it does not affect him. He’s a two faced fork tongued politician of the worst kind.
Secondly the final objective of the majority in the pro-life movement is the equivalent of a human life amendment which is far beyond just overturning Roe.
Amen! Well said. I will be joining you.
I’d take my ***dog*** over Hellary! That woman is evil incarnate.
What do you think about the Constitution Party?
“the final objective of the majority in the pro-life movement is the equivalent of a human life amendment which is far beyond just overturning Roe.”
That is the final one, but they’re a long way from that. The pro-life movement in this country has been more successful than they realize. Support for abortion on demand has fallen significantly over the last 10 to 15 years.
And if what you say about Giuliani not feeling that strongly about legal abortion is correct, than as President, he’ll do nothing to prevent Roe vs. Wade from being overturned because it’s not that important to him, and not in his best interest to do so. He certainly won’t impose a pro-abort litmus test to Supreme Court judges, and you know that all of the Democrats will.
If any Republican wins the White House in 2008, IMHO, Roe vs. Wade will be on borrowed time.
I’m thinking of a real credible threat to the liberties of unborn children once the GOP is no longer pro-life. We’ll still survive even under hillary.
Rudy and yourself must think that pro-life voters are gullible enough to buy that a supporter of abortion would nominate judges that would overturn Roe. Ford, Reagan and Bush, who were professed pro-lifers, all nominated supreme court justices who sided with Roe. It is ridiculous to believe that the abortionist would do differently.
"I’ll pray that the majority of our pro-life conservative leaders, senators, congressmen, governors, statesmen, commentators, grassroots groups, etc, vociferously condemn the culture of death abortionists, resign from the Republican party and form a new pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Liberty, pro-America conservative party and offer us a real choice between evil socialism and righteous freedom. "
Vote for Life and be counted.
Rudy fails the courage test and for that reason he will not get my vote as a Catholic
Why?..Leadership takes courage. He showed plenty of courage during 9/11..However, he has abandoned the teachings of the Catholic Church which he knows so well, and has shown a lack of courage by adopting a pro-=choice (~ anti-Catholic) position for the sake of political expediency. He has also remarried and is now with his third wife-also in violation of the Church’s teachings. We worked hard for 30 years to vote for the right candidates-Republican- and to try and overturn Roe v Wade, said our Rosaries, prayed at the Masses and the Right to Life Masses, and now we are being asked to support a pro-choice Republican candidate?..No Thanks...No way!...This is a war of good vs evil..There is no compromise, only victory for one side of the other....
As for voting for the lesser of two evils?...if given a choice between two candidates- one pro-choice and one pro-euthanasia, who would you choose ?...or one who supports genocide and one who supports gulags, who would you vote for ?...a choice of lesser of two evils given two very bad choices is no choice, it is siding with the evil itself...
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.