In Forbidden Planet, the eccentric genius Dr. Edward Morbius demonstrates at one point his futuristic robot, Robby, to a fascinated group of space travelers. In order to explain why Robby, despite his many superhuman abilities, is just about useless as a bodyguard, Morbius hands a powerful nuclear ray-gun over to the mechanical marvel. He commands the robot to point the weapon directly at one of the spacemen, to aim right between the eyes … and to fire.
The robot obeys completely … right up until the moment of truth. Then, just as Robby prepares to squeeze the trigger, a horrible clattering sound spills out of his head, and short-circuiting energy waves splash across his faceplate like exploding fireworks. The robot quivers, shivers, shudders, and finally seizes up like the aluminum engine block of a 1973 Vega.
“You see, gentlemen,” says Morbius. “He’s helpless. Locked in a sub-electronic dilemma between my direct order and his own built-in prohibition against harming any rational being….”
Well, last week, as I tried to interpret my copy of the pre-election “Guide to Political Responsibility,” by the U.S. Catholic Bishops, I knew exactly how Robby the Robot must have felt.
Take this passage for instance: “As Catholics, our consciences will not permit us to abandon unborn children because they are seen as unwanted or inconvenient…. Abortion and euthanasia are morally wrong because they attack life itself, the most fundamental good and the condition for all others. We support constitutional protection for unborn human life and legislative efforts to oppose abortion and euthanasia.”
All excellent stuff, of course, and, to simple folk like myself, a clear call to vote for George W. Bush. After all, his major opponent, Al Gore, explicitly opposes constitutional protection for unborn human life, while Bush favors it. Other statements in the document seem to point the way to Bush, as well. “Tax, workplace, divorce, and welfare policies must be designed to help families stay together,” we’re told, “and must reward responsibility and sacrifice for children.” “We support adequate funding to educate all children, no matter what school they attend” — a not-so-veiled reference to school vouchers, another of George W’s pet issues.
So the Bishops are calling us to vote for Bush, right?
Actually, no. It’s a bit more complex than that. The document goes on to say “We reaffirm traditional teaching on the right of workers to choose to organize and bargain collectively,” and includes strong words against corporate exploitation of the poor — hardly Republican strong points. So, perhaps this is a call to vote for Pat Buchanan. Buchanan is strongly pro-life, but he also supports trade unionism and legislative protection for U.S. jobs against unfair trade practices. In fact, Buchanan not only champions the interests of labor better than Bush, he champions them better than Gore, the Democrat, who helped Mr. Clinton push GATT and NAFTA through Congress.
So, Buchanan is the Bishop’s best choice, then.
Or maybe not. “As Catholics,” the paper states, “our conscience will not permit us…to turn our backs on immigrants because they lack the proper documents, or to turn away from poor women and children because they lack economic or political power.”
Well, turning our backs on immigrants is exactly what Buchanan does want us to do; Buchanan, the man who has encouraged us to build a wall across our own southern border and to deny healthcare to undocumented children. There’s more, as well: “We support those policies that create jobs with adequate pay and decent working conditions, increase the minimum wage so that it becomes a living wage, and overcome barriers to equal pay and employment for women and minorities.”
“Where the effects of past discrimination persist,” the document continues, “society has the obligation to take positive steps to overcome the legacy of injustice, including fairly administered affirmative action programs.” And later on, “Our society must address the growing culture of violence by advocating…support for gun safety measures, and reasonable restrictions on access to assault weapons and handguns.” Well, it’s Al Gore who has called for an increased minimum wage, isn’t it? And isn’t it Al Gore who supports affirmative action, and who has repeatedly called for “common sense” gun control? Then it must be Al Gore who, in the Bishops’ estimation, would most effectively wage war on the culture of death…
But then there’s another little clause in the document, a call for unwavering “opposition to the death penalty.” Oops. Al Gore backs the death penalty to the hilt, as do all the major candidates. Except for…
Ralph Nader! The Bishops must be calling us to support Nader, right? He is, after all, the only anti-death penalty horse in the race! Except, isn’t Nader strongly pro-abortion? And pro-euthanasia? And pro-fetal experimentation, etc., etc., etc. And doesn’t that take us neatly back to square one?
“You see? He’s helpless. Locked in a sub-electronic dilemma.” And you needn’t be Aristotle to see that even the most obedient Catholic won’t be able to follow all of these admirable injunctions. Not with the candidates we’ve been presented with this year.
What will happen, then?
The “Catholic vote” will splinter into negligibility. Once in the voting booth — and still locked in their “sub-electronic dilemma” — most Catholics will fall back on their old traditional allegiances. “My Daddy was always a Republican.” “We’ve been Democrats since FDR.” Those who think a bit more deeply will choose which of the Bishops’ priorities they themselves are most interested in, i.e., concern for the poor, concern for immigrants, concern for the death penalty, and so on. I myself find at least a bit of comfort in one phrase I noticed: “Abortion…attacks life itself, the most fundamental good and the condition for all others.” That, at least, gives me some guidance as to which value rates highest on the scale, and manages at the same time to simplify my choice somewhat by eliminating two of the major candidates outright.
But make no mistake. The Catholic vote will not matter again in U.S. politics until the sub-electronic dilemma is broken — until individual Catholics care enough to roll up their sleeves…and create some alternatives.
