Dear CE,
We watched This Week with George Stephanopolos today, including an interview with Theodore McCarrick. Then I read People of Faith Deliver the Election. The cardinal said that a Catholic could not vote for a candidate because the candidate is “pro-abortion” (I interpret “pro-abortion” to mean that a candidate supports a woman's constitutional right to chose abortion).
If I understood him right, what the cardinal said implied that a voter who votes for a candidate because they agree with the candidate's position to defend current case law regarding abortion (OK during the first three months, and regulation beyond that to be determined by state law), are sinful persons. The message to any Catholic person of average intelligence is that, “under pain of sin,” they should not vote for a candidate, for the reason that the candidate is defending the rights of pregnant women, under the US Constitution. To me, this is saying that Catholics should oppose the provision of the case law interpretations of the US Constitution which allows women to have abortions (at least during the first three months, because the Catholic Church regards human life to begin at conception).
To me, for this one belief, the cardinal is endorsing a decision making process which would operate, were our government a theocracy (law equals religious beliefs of the majority, as in Sharia). Further, is this is the only Catholic belief for which such a decision making process is expected, and about which Catholics are being told by church leaders that they must conform, “under pain of sin”? If so, I must say, what about invasion of another country, absent imminent threat! Abortion, no matter how soon after conception, is worse than the preemptive invasion of another country? Isn't that implied?
I think, whatever belief is involved, that for a religion to operate in such a way as to influence the decision of an elected official (or of a candidate) regarding law is just flat out disrespectful of “no law respecting religion.” Surely I've got this wrong. Surely Catholics in the US are not expected to oppose this one case law interpretation of the US Constitution, on the grounds that it does not conform with a belief of the Catholic faith. And, surely Catholics are not expected to act in some similar fashion with respect to rights of gays to easily access rights of survivorship, or rights of others to possible health benefits from stem cell research or contraception (which might reduce incidences of unwanted pregnancies and subsequent abortions and HIV/AIDS).
Mike
Dear Mike:
Fantastic as it may seem, Catholics are expected to believe and practice the Catholic Faith, including “You shall not kill.”
And even more amazingly, that continues to be the case, even when the Imperial Judiciary pre-empts democratic deliberation and imposes an abortion regime on the nation. In fact, the Catholic mindset is so evil, anti-democratic and perverse, that many Catholics actually think that the question of abortion should be decided democratically, and not by our Robed Masters in the Judiciary.
Welcome to Democracy, Mike. It's a system where even Catholics get to express their views and, if enough people agree with them, perhaps even impose those views on others. If you are about to blather the idiotic mantra “You Can't Legislate Morality”, please attempt to shake off your TV-induced stupor and read the following:
Mark Shea
Senior Content Editor
Catholic Exchange
Editor's Note: To contact Catholic Exchange, please refer to our Contact Us page.
Please note that all email submitted to Catholic Exchange or its authors (regarding articles published at CE) become the property of Catholic Exchange and may be published in this space. Published letters may be edited for length and clarity. Names and cities of letter writers may also be published. Email addresses of viewers will not normally be published.