Posted on 01/21/2009 4:46:45 AM PST by fabrizio
Washington DC, Jan 21, 2009 / 03:19 am (CNA).- Former Supreme Court nominee Judge Robert Bork has predicted that upcoming legal battles will have significant ramifications for religious freedom. He names as issues of major concern the continued freedom of Catholic hospitals to refuse to perform abortions and the likely terrible conflict resulting from the advancement of homosexual rights.
Speaking in an interview published Tuesday by Cybercast News Service, Judge Bork discussed the contentious nature of modern politics.
Everything is up for debate these days. I cant think of anything that isnt, he said.
You are going to get Catholic hospitals that are going to be required as a matter of law to perform abortions, he claimed.
We are going to see in the near future a terrible conflict between claimed rights of homosexuals and religious freedom You are going to get Catholic or other groups relief services that are going to be required to allow adoption of a child by homosexual couples. We are going to have a real conflict that goes right to the heart of the society.
Asked whether there was a freedom of conscience clause anywhere in the Constitution that might prohibit the U.S. government from compelling a religious hospital to perform abortions, he replied:
Well, the free exercise of religion clause might fulfill that role.
He agreed with the CNS interviewer, Editor in Chief Terry Jeffrey, that such coercion forces someone to act against their religion and could be construed as a violation of the right to free exercise of religion.
However, Judge Bork was unsure about whether the U.S. Supreme Court would uphold such a right. He predicted the decision would rest with Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who in some cases sides with liberals and at other times with originalists, those who profess to hold a more tradition-minded interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.
It depends upon Anthony Kennedy, Judge Bork told CNS. Now, its a funny situation in which the moral life of a nation is in effect decided by one judge, because you have four solid liberal votes, four solid originalist votes, and one vote you cant predict too accurately in advance.
Though Justice Kennedy is a Catholic, he sided with the majority who upheld the pro-abortion rights Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade in the 1992 case Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
Judge Bork said that a decision involving the freedom of Catholic hospitals to refuse to perform abortions would split by a 5-4 vote.
But I dont know which way, he added.
The Cybercast News interview with the jurist also touched upon the place of religion in public life.
I dont think the disputants talk much about God anymore, Judge Bork commented. Thats one of the things that I think is regrettable--and I know liberals have said the same thing, it is not a conservative position particularly--but it is regrettable that religion has dropped out of our public discourse. I think it impoverishes it and makes it more violent.
He explained that he believed this violence was not armed conflict, but rather violent language and propaganda.
Judge Bork said he also thought that America is now going down a path towards kind of a happy-go-lucky nihilism.
A lot of people are nihilists, he continued. They dont think about religion. They dont think about ultimate questions. They go along. They worry about consumer goods, comfort, and so forth.
As a matter of fact, the abortion question is largely a question about convenience. If you look at the polls about why people have abortions, 90 percent of it has nothing to do with medical conditions. Its convenience. And thats I think an example of the secularization of an issue that ought to have a religious dimension.
When asked whether a nihilistic society can remain happy-go-lucky for long, Judge Bork replied:
I dont know. I guess we are going to find out.
A lot of people are nihilists, he continued. They dont think about religion. They dont think about ultimate questions. They go along. They worry about consumer goods, comfort, and so forth.
He nails it.
I'm sure the folks that pack the church and the parking lot twice a year see themselves as "good Catholics". I mean, we all like to see ourselves as good, no matter what we're doing.
The real question for such a survey would be: How often do you attend Mass? (a) once a week or more; (b) 2-3 times a month; (c) Christmas and Easter; (d) for weddings and funerals. THAT would separate the sheep from the goats.
I’ve got lots of practicing Jewish friends who didn’t vote Democrat and according to them, they never have.
I honestly don’t know what to think anymore. Of course, in about what, 18 to 24 months(?), NO ONE will have ever voted for Obama, (hee hee).
"Nihilists! **** me. I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos."
Something is seriously wrong here that so many mass attending Catholics would vote for Obama. I haven't looked but I bet the stats aren't much better for fundamentalist Christians.
http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?ID=281
And still most Catholics voted for Obama. Again: why?
Before answering that question, let me cite one more vitally important piece of polling information: Among Catholic voters who attend Mass weekly, McCain won majority support: 54- 45%. Among those who do not attend weekly Mass, the margin for Obama was an overwhelming 61- 37%. Thus Obama drew his support from inactive Catholics. And unfortunately, most American Catholics are inactive.
“I don’t roll on Shabbos.”
It will take 2-3 generations to make this right.
I provided a link and a quote in post #65. I said that 46% of Mass attending Catholics voted for Obama. In the link provided it states 45% of Catholics who attended **weekly** voted for Obama.
It means getting Catholic children out of the government school indoctrination camps, and totally reforming Catholic schools and universities that preach Liberation Theology and worship Karl Marx.
By the way, do NOT send your precious children to Villanova University, an Augustinian university. As an alumna of this university, I testify that it is more devoted to Marxist theology than it is Christ.
Better orthodox, conservative Presbyterians than lapsed Catholics.
Zero or nearly zero percent of traditional Catholics who attend the pre-Vatican II Latin Mass voted for Obama
What's my point? Modernism is a bad thing.
I agree.
I agree.
Ping
This question works for most "contemporary" Catholics but I know of traditionalists who don't always have a Mass with the proper rubrics nearby and so they say Rosaries instead, etc. They still consider themselves to be good and observant Catholics, if more discerning, which is valid, IMO.
I don't see how 'discernment' (which often shades over into pride) should be given precedence over obedience, of which there is not nearly enough around these days.
The Rosary is no substitute for a valid Mass (and the Mass may be valid but illicit and still fulfil the obligation).
Father Z, who is as orthodox as they come, opines here.
Now that BXVI has issued the motu proprio, I'm afraid a lot of the trad movement is simply folding its arms and stamping its feet.
Secular jews, secular catholics. None of them of much use in God’s Kingdom.
Do's And Don'ts--Faithful Citizenship--United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
It's a long and very complicated list that boils down to this: Saving the 501(c)(3) status of the Catholic Church in the U.S. is more important than saving souls.
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.