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 can’t think of anything that isn’t,” 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, it’s 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 can’t 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 don’t know which way,” he added.
The Cybercast News interview with the jurist also touched upon the place of religion in public life.
“I don’t think the disputants talk much about God anymore,” Judge Bork commented. “That’s 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 don’t think about religion. They don’t 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. It’s convenience. And that’s 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 don’t know. I guess we are going to find out.”
And ultimately, more important than saving unborn children, because the failure to provide leadership regarding the Nov. 4 election resulted in 56% of Catholics voting for one of abortion's fiercest advocates.
Our parish is Ordinary Form, although we chant the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin every First Sunday. Our younger Parochial Vicar has gotten hold of the DVD from the FSSP and is learning the Extraordinary Rite (the younger priests in this archdiocese are VERY orthodox). Of course, our archbishop invited the FSSP in years ago - their parish is down the road a ways and doing quite well.
But our priests are holy men and careful to celebrate reverently, we kneel in all the proper places, nobody looks at you funny if you kneel to receive or receive on the tongue (I always do). (But if you hold hands during the "Our Father" or do the "holy field goal attempt" at the Sursum Corda, you WILL get funny looks!)
But before skipping my Sunday obligation just because I was upset, I would find a holy priest and clear all this with him, rather than making a judgment based on feelings and something you read on the internet. I have been to some pretty strange Masses rather than miss . . . as Sister Mary Attila used to say, "Offer it up!"
“But before skipping my Sunday obligation just because I was upset, I would find a holy priest and clear all this with him”
In this diocese you’d have better luck finding a leprechaun.
A lot of praying as well as suffering ahead!
That’s a good point! Catholics and Baptists (and other denominations that still hold real Christian values) need to unite against the common enemy. The Catholic bishops are not strong, a few are, most are not, better ones are coming, but we can’t wait around for them. It’s got to be from the folks.
I’m Catholic and know many Baptists and have been a guest at Baptist services. I am so impressed with them. I see we have huge gaps in theology, but the core values are the same. These Baptists are loving and strong and active, unlike so many lukewarm in both Catholic and protestant churches. Instead of trying to convert one another, let’s focus on our mutual beliefs and fight the evil in our society. There’s power in unity. We are all together in that 47% that did NOT vote for Obama.
“And still most Catholics voted for Obama. Again: why?”
Wintertime, the only answer I can possibly come up with is in contradiction to your tagline. No offense, but I begin to wonder: maybe most people ARE stupid.
Our kids need to come out of the public schools PERIOD
Your call.
The common faithful Catholic can reform his church simply by educating his **own** children, and joining with his Catholic neighbors in helping to educate theirs.
This can be done regardless of whether the bishop is a traditionalist or a Marxist sympathizing Liberation Theologist.
In one generation these faithful Catholics can begin to send sons into the priesthood and they will eventually rise to positions of influence.
“but there is one ancient priest (and I’m not kidding, he must be 90) who is a straight-up faithful old-fashioned Soldier for Christ, and a good confessor.”
I found such a priest — in Tokyo — but not here.
“I do not understand how he can hold this wrong-headed view and be reliable on any other issue.”
Have you read “Slouching Toward Gomorrah?”
“In one generation these faithful Catholics can begin to send sons into the priesthood”
How are they going to get into the priesthood while the sodomites control the seminaries?
He talks a good game for publication, but when it came down to his actual work, he refused to support the Second Amendment.
What that tells me is that he trusts government, not individuals. Despite all his holy talk, when push comes to shove he'll be backing the government.
That's why a politician's position on the 2nd Amendment is my litmus test. It tells me whether he trusts me or not.
Judge Bork does not trust me.
I am very leery of Jesuits, however, wherever I encounter them. They set off the same radar for me that always made me bore in for cross-examination of a witness.
I have been surprised by the Franciscans -- I've met a lot of goofy ones, but they're still good faithful priests and they love Jesus.
“he refused to support the Second Amendment.”
I hereby direct you to cater to my laziness and give me a citation for that.
Or...rather...maybe...could you tell me someplace to look that up?
The NRA was not behind him for precisely that reason.
He also has said the same thing in several print interviews, one iirc with Life magazine.
All I would do to find them is google them, same as you.
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.