Posted on 10/01/2008 11:17:38 AM PDT by presidio9
I believe that abortion is an unspeakable evil, yet I support Sen. Barack Obama, who is pro-choice. I do not support him because he is pro-choice, but in spite of it. Is that a proper moral choice for a committed Catholic?
As one of the inaugural members of the U.S. bishops' National Review Board on clergy sexual abuse, and as a canon lawyer, I answer with a resounding yes.
Despite what some Republicans would like Catholics to believe, the list of what the church calls "intrinsically evil acts" does not begin and end with abortion. In fact, there are many intrinsically evil acts, and a committed Catholic must consider all of them in deciding how to vote.
Last November, the U.S. bishops released "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship," a 30-page document that provides several examples of intrinsically evil acts: abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem-cell research, torture, racism, and targeting noncombatants in acts of war.
Obama's support for abortion rights has led some to the conclusion that no Catholic can vote for him. That's a mistake. While I have never swayed in my conviction that abortion is an unspeakable evil, I believe that we have lost the abortion battle -- permanently. A vote for Sen. John McCain does not guarantee the end of abortion in America. Not even close.
Let's suppose Roe v. Wade were overturned. What would happen? The matter would simply be kicked back to the states -- where it was before 1973. Overturning Roe would not abolish abortion. It would just mean that abortion would be legal in some states and illegal in others. The number of abortions would remain unchanged as long as people could travel.
McCain has promised to appoint "strict constructionist" judges who would presumably vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. But is that sufficient reason for a Catholic to vote Republican? To answer that question, let's look at the rest of the church's list of intrinsically evil acts.
Both McCain and Obama get failing marks on embryonic stem-cell research, which Catholic teaching opposes. The last time the issue was up for a vote in the Senate, both men voted to ease existing restrictions.
But what about an unjust war? In 2003, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) said flatly that "reasons sufficient for unleashing a war against Iraq did not exist." McCain voted for it; Obama opposed it.
What about torture? "There is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes," according to Antonio Taguba, the retired major general who investigated abuses in Iraq. Obama opposes the use of torture in all cases; McCain, himself a victim of torture, voted to allow the CIA to use so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques" -- a euphemism for torture.
How, some may ask, can I compare these evils with abortion? The right to abortion is guaranteed by the federal judiciary's interpretation of the Constitution. And while the president appoints federal judges, the connection between a president's appointments and the decisions rendered by his appointees is tenuous at best. After all, in 1992, five Republican-appointed justices voted to uphold Roe v. Wade in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Yet on other intrinsic evils -- an unjust war, torture, ignoring the poor -- I can address those evils directly by changing the president.
There's another distinction that is often lost in the culture-war rhetoric on abortion: There is a difference between being pro-choice and being pro-abortion. Obama supports government action that would reduce the number of abortions, and has consistently said that "we should be doing everything we can to avoid unwanted pregnancies that might even lead somebody to consider having an abortion." He favors a "comprehensive approach where ... we are teaching the sacredness of sexuality to our children." And he wants to ensure that adoption is an option for women who might otherwise choose abortion.
Obama worked all of that into his party's platform this year. By contrast, Republicans actually removed abortion-reduction language from their platform.
What's more, as recent data show, abortion rates drop when the social safety net is strengthened. If Obama's economic program will do more to reduce poverty than McCain's, then is it wrong to conclude that an Obama presidency will also reduce abortions? Not at all.
Every faithful Catholic agrees that abortion is an unspeakable evil that must be minimized, if not eliminated. I can help to achieve that without endorsing Republicans' immoral baggage. Overturning Roe v. Wade is not the only way to end abortion, and a vote for Obama is not somehow un-Catholic.
The U.S. bishops have urged a "different kind of political engagement," one that is "shaped by the moral convictions of well-formed consciences."
I have informed my conscience. I have weighed the facts. I have used my prudential judgment. And I conclude that it is a proper moral choice for this Catholic to support Barack Obama's candidacy.
Cafardi is a civil and canon lawyer, and a professor and former dean at Duquesne University School of Law in Pittsburgh. His most recent book, Before Dallas, examines the bishops' failures in handling the clergy sex abuse crisis.
Jackass.
This sounds like a confession to me.
Your priest may assign 125 Hail Marys to you, but God will not accept them becaise God does not condone murder, especially murder of innocents He has sent to earth. If you support Obama, you support abortion.
Liberalism/Socialism/Collectivism
are all based in the breaking of at least two commandments -
do not covet
do not steal
The ideology cannot exist without breaking these.
The author calls himself catholic but his actions dictate otherwise. Should he die without last rites, to hell he shall go.
If this guy is a canon lawyer he needs to be disbarred immediately.
AMEN !
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
He who aborts a baby inside the womb, could have just as well eaten a human being.
Rom 14:21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.
Rom 14:15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.
Rom 14:23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
Rom 14:23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
Way to keep the faith there, dude.
A vote for Sen. John McCain does not guarantee the end of abortion in America.
A vote for Sen. 0bama does guarantee the continuation of abortion on demand.
Cardinal Ratzinger (now the Pope) wrote in his letter to Cardinal McCarrick back in 2004:
“A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favor of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.”
It's not a battle. It's a war. And there is no surrender.
Practically every Catholic in America has privately decided to follow their conscience and use contraceptives, completely ignoring the Church’s teaching that it is a mortal sin. And if you remember from the old-timey religion classes of the fifties, a mortal sin is a mortal sin, and your soul would be just as damned by the use of a condom as by getting an abortion. The last set of figures I saw showed that self-identified Catholics were as likely to get an abortion as any other segment of the population. Catholic politicians who support the war in Iraq don’t even bother to justify their disagreement with the Pope.
I don’t think that Catholics as a group are distinguished from the rest of America at the ballot box anymore. And they don’t go through long, involved defenses of their right to make up their own minds.
Did you see this? Michael Brown’s site”
“You may have heard of Fr. Tom DiLorenzo, a charismatic priest from Boston who has been on the radio for over 20 years,” comes an e-mail from Massachusetts. “He has a real prophetic gift as well as the gift of healing. As I listened this morning, Father Tom preached from Ezekiel 33 about the ‘watchman on the wall.’ He warned us of a vision he had in 1995, that he has already been preaching about for several years, which happened as follows:
“He had just been on a pilgrimage in France and went into a restaurant. He was very tired and closed his eyes for a minute and then described what he said was something like ‘Venetian blinds opening in front of me.’ What he saw next was the Titanic sinking, and the lifeboats were coming to try to rescue the people, but they couldn’t get the people into the boats. He interpreted that as ‘the world economic system going into the drink.’ The lifeboats represented the Church, and they didn’t know how to get the people into the boats. He said he could be wrong, of course, but he believed that this will happen. It may not be in ‘the next few months,’ but it is ‘on the horizon.’ He also believes this crisis is preparing the way for the coming of the Antichrist, and that one of the two politicians’: who will be elected is not the Antichrist, but may be the puppet of the Antichrist. That wasn’t part of the prophecy, just his take on what’s going on now. His point was this: the Church in America isn’t ready for what’s coming. We don’t know how to do without; we’re too soft. We need to get on our knees and pray and fast, or we won’t be able to help the people when things really start to go sour...”
Things that make you go Hmmmmmmm.....
A democrat majority in Congress and democrat president could pass a whole lot of mischief in bills that put the force of law behind their ideology.
And, we aren’t ready.
I remember reading something about this guy here, but can't recall exactly what. Could somebody give me a short refresher?
Such nonsense.
I really wish conservatives would use the same techniques on tthe other arguments.
Obama is pro torture and pro killing non combatants.
Why?
Saddam Hussein tortured and killed thousands of non combatants. Barack Hussein Obama supported leaving this system of torture and killing in place in Iraq. Only Bush and McCain supported this end to torture and killing
Cafardi is whacked.
Ah yes, the National Catholic Distorter!
I know what you are, but you’re definitely NOT a Catholic. Go find some other religion that tolerates the slaughter of preborn and newly born babies . . . perhaps the Universalist Unitarians where there is NO GOD.
The Catholic Church does not need people like you. You’re a disgrace.
When I saw this headline, I thought, "This has to be Nick!" I'm shocked.
We'll be speaking to his wife soon. It's going to be very uncomfortable.
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.