Posted on 10/14/2004 9:46:25 PM PDT by Coleus
Why is Bush getting the bishop's blessing?
| Thursday, October 14, 2004 |
NEWARK'S ARCHBISHOP John Myers wrote an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal last month on why Catholics cannot in good conscience vote for a pro-choice candidate. It was titled "A Voter's Guide."
Myers wrote that abortion and research that destroys human embryos are evil and that no other issue outweighs that evil in this presidential race: not the death penalty, poverty, or the war in Iraq.
The archbishop did not name names, but his message is clear: Catholics can't vote for John Kerry. Since Catholics make up one-quarter of the voting population, Myers would hand the election on a silver platter to President Bush.
Another archbishop, Charles Chaput of Colorado, is even more blunt: Voting for a candidate who is pro-choice or supports embryonic stem cell research is a sin, and the voter must confess it before receiving communion.
These dire warnings are part of an attempt by both the Bush campaign and conservative bishops to deliver the Catholic vote for the 2004 Republican ticket. In other words, Bush is endorsed by God.
This is a hard pill for many Catholics to swallow. In any election, American voters do not like to be dictated to - and this is no ordinary race. How can it be reduced to one issue when so much is at stake?
Bush and Kerry have starkly different views on preemptive war, how to fight terrorism, reducing nuclear proliferation, preserving the environment and expanding health care. All of these issues have the potential to save or destroy a great many lives.
Yet Catholic Kerry supporters are being told they must put aside their opposition to Bush's policies, which many of them have reached on moral grounds, and vote for a man who they believe has done some rather immoral things: taken the nation to war on false pretenses and made the world less safe by recklessly concentrating his resources on Iraq instead of the war on terror.
Some Catholic voters would consider their positions on these issues "pro-life."
But Myers says in his article that it's a numbers game: What other issue can outweigh 1.3 million abortions in America each year? Sadly, other issues do rival those numbers. Millions have died in civil wars in Africa in recent years, and genocide is happening in the Sudan right now. Millions have died from AIDS, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, and millions continue to be infected around the world. Millions could die in a military showdown with North Korea, for instance, if nuclear weapons were used.
Bush is pro-life, although he said during his first campaign he would not try to overturn Roe vs. Wade. But this time around, if reelected, he would likely name one or two justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. Given that his favorites on the court are Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, it's certainly possible that a future court would have enough votes to ban abortion.
But so far, Bush has done little to significantly lower the abortion rate in the United States. In some places, abortions have likely increased due to unemployment. And the U.N. Population Fund estimates that Bush's repeated withholding of U.S. funds pledged for family planning programs has led to hundreds of thousands of abortions in poor countries.
The conservative bishops have the right to speak out, even organize voter drives, although in coming so close to campaigning for a particular candidate, they may be jeopardizing the church's tax-exempt status.
For the record, I am pro-life. I believe life begins at conception and therefore, abortion is wrong.
But I also believe most wars are wrong.
I believe it's wrong to stand by while half a continent needlessly suffers and dies from AIDS. It's wrong to allow people in this country to die of easily curable illness because they have no health insurance. It's wrong to condemn children to lifelong poverty and waste their minds by denying them even the most basic education. It's wrong to allow corporate greed and influence to take precedence over fairness and generosity in the workplace, in the environment and in how we care for the most vulnerable in our nation and the world.
All of these issues, and a host of others, are relevant in this pivotal, polarized election, which defies reduction to a simple referendum on abortion.
The church should be working to lower the abortion rate in this country. But telling people how they must vote, on condition of losing their souls, goes too far.
Mary Ellen Schoonmaker is a Record editorial writer. Send comments to oped@northjersey.com, schoonmaker@northjersey.com
One good thing that has come out of the shameful queer priest episodes is that conservative priests and prelates are beginning to speak out.
Now, if only something could be done about the Jesuits!
Well, he pretended to be Irish for a long time, too.
After this damn election I hope we can find mutual Pro-Life topics to discuss.
And here’s one: It's not so much the fault of politics that our culture is in the rotten shape it's in. It's the fault of traitorous, as well as spineless Christian leaders who never properly educated their flocks—and parents their children—on the sanctity of life and the just role of government.
Askel, I finished The McHugh Chronicles. I think McHugh caused more damage to the Respect for life than any TWO politicians including Bush the 1st and Kissinger.
Would you agree?
And here’s one: It's not so much the fault of politics that our culture is in the rotten shape it's in. It's the fault of traitorous, as well as spineless Christian leaders who never properly educated their flocks—and parents their children—on the sanctity of life and the just role of government. - cpforlife.org
I am confused as to why such people would attach themselves to a religion.
OUCH!!! Well put and worthy of serious thought for those who do not frequent this site.... especially those who call themselves Catholic.
But none of those other issues have anything to do with Church doctrine.
No where did the Church mention loosing one souls, the closest thing stated was a Sin, which can be forgiven when the sinner asks for it. The only one who talked of loosing ones soul is the author.
In part ... but only because he -- like Bush I, Bush II and Kissinger -- did his work from the INSIDE.
As for the education of Christian leaders, I think most are familiar with Commandment No. 2 ... thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain. And one would assume a politician -- Christian or not -- would be familiar with the Declaration's holding that "all men are CREATED equal."
That's just another reason I cannot fathom how Christians could possibly countenance the gilding of Bush's ESCR decision with Scripture. Seriously bent.
Recently the Catholic Church bestowed great honors on Karl Hapsburg who -- unlike our current crop of so-called Christian leadership -- did not separate his faith from his "public actions" but kept them in perfect concert.
That's all that's lacking, CP. Men of principle unafraid to act by their principles. Toward that end, I enjoy this bit from "The State and the Soul":
Politics are intended to be the means of realising ethical principles. Such, anyway, was the original plan. Politics are meant to open the door to what theology and philosophy decide upon as a code of right behaviour. "This is the good life," says the thinker; "it leads to happiness and to God." "Very well," says the politician, "we must adopt it and extend it for the benefit of all." The assumption here is that the thinker is a Christian moralist, and the politician is an honest man. It is a bold assumption.
There's just no point in voting for folks based on their "personal convictions" when the name of the game (thanks largely to the CATHOLIC Kennedy's campaign mantra and the work of those CATHOLICS whose attended Hesburgh's Interlock-funded consciousness raising sessions at Notre Dame in the 60s), the maxim of the so-called conservative politician is: I'm personally, opposed, but ...
You and me, both, CP ... I can't wait until the election's over!! =)
*****a lot of supposed Catholics really don't know what to think any more. You can blame the bishops (and yes, the pope) for their various confusing and ambivalent statements over the last 34 years.*****
And the reason the supposed Catholics are not reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church is ? ? ?
*****After this damn election I hope we can find mutual Pro-Life topics to discuss. *****
If those who have posted here mean what they say, then YES, FReepers must find mutual Pro-Life topics to discuss AND to forward to our Federal (and State) Legislatures, President and Governors.
We're talking about it now when there's so little time to actually DO something about pro-abortion/death legislation.
Let's agree to meet here after the election (and we've settled down) to do some MAJOR discussing and talking about what we can do individually and as a group with regards to lobbying for life (and against abortion).
Thanks to everyone who has shared and those who have done a whale of research!
Great. Thanks.
Also I wanted to thank you for posting the McHugh chronicles back in 99-2000, and opening that door to me. Mrs. Engel is a true champion and should be in the front of the Movement. I suppose the politics within and the weasels who don't like to rock the boat have marginalized her into great obscurity, as she seems unknown to most lifers.
A question for ya'
Can you recommend any other books or sources related to the McHugh Chronicles or anything that exposes what was going on behind the scenes like Engel does?
Also, so you know: I can pull up: A Eugenics Primer http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3840573f5cda.htm
But not: Population Control: The Final Solution (Part 1 of 3) http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3926ba0b3bfa.htm Though 2 and 3 come up.
Can't get this on either! THE HATCH DEBACLE -- How the Human Life Bill of Hyde and Helms was Killed http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3856ea771cb1.htm
I find that hitting the f-5 key a couple times will sometimes make a stubborn Ancient post come up anyway.
if it doesn't work, let me know and I'll see if I have them archived myself. (likely)
Wow ... I thought I had a cache.
Give some thought to what it would take to weasel a CD out of you ... =)
It's over 2 gigs. Lots of past versions of the websites and junk. I could clear a lot and get on 2 Discs.
All it would take is if you would be so kind as to do a very serious critique of a Pro-Life document and offer ideas and feedback.
You got it.
(I'm at your disposal anytime ... disk or no disk. Anything I can do to help.)
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.