A gut check for American Catholicism

[Ridgerunner]

IMHO, the GOP has done no more than lip service to pro-life voters, while taking for granted that they will keep voting them into office and keep donating $$ to them.

There are too many Americans who believe that abortion should remain legal to expect that ANY politician is going to make a serious effort to make it illegal. Change the mindset of the American PEOPLE and we will see a change in the attitude of the politicians.

There was more than mere lip service. There were a number of Bush executive orders against funding abortion. There were legislative enactments of the same sort. Bush appointed two prolife members to the Supreme Court. It has to be remembered that Bush never had a “filibuster proof majority” like Obama has. It would have been an exceedingly difficult task for Bush to overturn Roe or even limit it. without either a filibuster proof majority in Congress or one more Supreme Court appointment. Had a prolife Republican won last November, with a Republican majority in Congress, abortion on demand would have probably been doomed. But none of those conditions happened.

What we got was a virulently pro-abortion president and majority in Congress that are busily undoing every protection for the unborn.

I am not a Republican, but people who are frustrated with how difficult it is to reverse a Supreme Court decision, should not blame the only party that has any prolife members and a prolife orientation because it couldn’t succeed in getting a big enough vote to accomplish the task, and meanwhile get all warm and fuzzy about the party that really is pro-abortion and is responsible for undoing every prolife thing the Republicans did.

The majority of Americans is ALREADY in favor of abortion limitations. It is the Democrat Party and its president that do, and will continue to prevent the will of the majority from being given effect. All of this “there has to be a change of heart on the part of the electorate” is just a red herring the abortionists like to throw out in order to prevent anything really effective (like their defeat) from happening.

 

[andrewagill]

I was speaking of how we are to act as responsible citizens when we are often faced with a choice that MUST be made where BOTH groups or candidates support or condone some law or action that is at least possibly intrinsically evil. Do we just stay home ALL THE TIME, then, being good men who choose to do nothing?

That’s a good question. Do you know if the Church has made a statement on that? I know of at least one statement that has been made on exactly that subject, but I’d like to know if I’ve missed another such statement.

What a snakelike tactic! Read the very next sentence from your quote my friend:
“Consequently, without in the least denying the influence on morality exercised by circumstances and especially by intentions,”

Here is an explicit recognition that morality is affected by circumstances and intentions!

Your source was concerned with explaining what an intrinsic evil is and what sorts of actions they are. It was not about weighing the severity of those evils against each other or morality in context of circumstances. An intrinsically evil act is one that cannot be made good, but that, as the sentence you deceptively choose to ignore clearly states, individual culpability and the degree of evil is affected by circumstance and intention.

Very well. Let us quote this sentence together:

Consequently, without in the least denying the influence on morality exercised by circumstances and especially by intentions, the Church teaches that “there exist acts which per se and in themselves, independently of circumstances, are always seriously wrong by reason of their object”.

In other words, while there are actions where you need to look at the circumstances and intentions, here is a list of acts where the circumstances do not enter into it.

It’s not that I’m a hard-core Republican, actually I was a Democrat for most of my life, but I came to the realization that Democrats are so wrong on the life issues that it has poisoned all their other policies. They don’t value human life and it shows in a myriad ways.

I am sorry to have given that impression. We will end abortion, and I believe that this end will come soon. I can see the tide turning, and I don’t think we need to look for a big miracle, but rather God working in His usual, subtle ways on the hearts of the people.

Prayer and protest will work, but we need to be smart about it. Don’t give the opposition anything to work with.

I know one person suggested Machiavellian tactics. We can’t do evil to gain the outcome that will be pleasing to the Lord, but there is nothing wrong with getting down and dirty so long as we stay on the right side of the actions that are permissible, and not all of Machiavelli’s tactics are intrinsically evil.

And we will end it despite the intransigence of any particular party.

 

[Arandur]

Consequently, without in the least denying the influence on morality exercised by circumstances and especially by intentions, the Church teaches that “there exist acts which per se and in themselves, independently of circumstances, are always seriously wrong by reason of their object”.

In other words, while there are actions where you need to look at the circumstances and intentions, here is a list of acts where the circumstances do not enter into it.

Wrong. This is merely explaining what an intrinsically evil act is–as opposed to an act that could or could not be evil, such as having sexual intercourse. Sex outside of marriage or coercive, contraceptive, or lust-driven sex in marriage is an evil act. But sex itself is not intrinsically evil; there is context in which it is good. Homosexual sex is an intrinsic evil, even if the intentions and context of the act are otherwise similar to chaste heterosexual sex–in a lifelong committed relationship, done out of love. The culpability of those who commit intrinsically evil acts is affected by context. Another example is killing. Killing another human being is an evil. Killing in the context of last resort self defence, last resort attempts to protect the innocent (capital punishment when safe imprisonment is not an option for the government), or just war, does not make those committing it guilty of what could otherwise easily be a mortal sin.

So that statement is not saying that “circumstances do not enter into” the degree of evil or guilt of the act. It is very simply just explaining that there are indeed acts that are intrinsically evil and never a good or preferable thing. It is not waving away the importance of context in moral choices–it is not negating the sentence just prior to it.

And it is certainly not saying that all acts that are intrinsically evil are equivalent in the degree of their evil, their magnitude, and the harm they do. Offending the dignity of an individual by exploiting their labor is in that list of intrinsic evils, but do you really think it’s as bad as killing them? As selling them into sexual slavery? As slaughtering their babies?

Of course not. Thus it is nonsense to try to use those quotes to suggest that offending the dignity of and causing mental harm and distress to a few murder suspects (in an attempt to save lives) in any way should be measured equivalently in citizenship choices to the massacre of millions of defenseless innocents.

As for political parties, when it comes down to election day we must make hard choices that often, as other posters have well stated, involve choosing least harm. But we have a responsibility until that final choice to work in whatever way we can to reform our political representation to advocate sound moral principles. We should be working to get candidates with proper moral positions to that final voting line as viable options. But once we get to the voting booth, if we don’t have those wonderful choices, we still must make a responsible choice.

 

[andrewagill]

So that statement is not saying that “circumstances do not enter into” the degree of evil or guilt of the act. It is very simply just explaining that there are indeed acts that are intrinsically evil and never a good or preferable thing. It is not waving away the importance of context in moral choices–it is not negating the sentence just prior to it.

Very well. Some evils may be greater or lesser either in our own fallible eyes or by profound theological teachings. The Church uses extraordinary terms to express Her shock at abortion and many other grave evils. This distinction, however, does not come from the document above.

May we, therefore, do evil in providing support for those who commit evil acts–such as torture–that good may come–namely the end of abortion?

 

[mkingdomlvr]

There was more than mere lip service. There were a number of Bush executive orders against funding abortion. There were legislative enactments of the same sort. Bush appointed two prolife members to the Supreme Court. It has to be remembered that Bush never had a “filibuster proof majority” like Obama has. It would have been an exceedingly difficult task for Bush to overturn Roe or even limit it. without either a filibuster proof majority in Congress or one more Supreme Court appointment. Had a prolife Republican won last November, with a Republican majority in Congress, abortion on demand would have probably been doomed. But none of those conditions happened.

What we got was a virulently pro-abortion president and majority in Congress that are busily undoing every protection for the unborn.

I am not a Republican, but people who are frustrated with how difficult it is to reverse a Supreme Court decision, should not blame the only party that has any prolife members and a prolife orientation because it couldn’t succeed in getting a big enough vote to accomplish the task, and meanwhile get all warm and fuzzy about the party that really is pro-abortion and is responsible for undoing every prolife thing the Republicans did.

The majority of Americans is ALREADY in favor of abortion limitations. It is the Democrat Party and its president that do, and will continue to prevent the will of the majority from being given effect. All of this “there has to be a change of heart on the part of the electorate” is just a red herring the abortionists like to throw out in order to prevent anything really effective (like their defeat) from happening.

The GOP had plenty of opportunities to boldly proclaim their allegiance to life, they simply chose to take the easy way out. They had the majority in Congress and the WH more than once. Watch how bold the Democrats are going to be with their majority and think of what the GOP could have done if they had the guts.

The majority of Americans are STILL in favor of legalized abortion, which is why the GOP plays timid. The majority will accept restrictions, but they do not want abortion criminalized. Limitations are not acceptable if you are truly pro-life. Pro life means abortion is never an option, does it not?

Also, the black/white characterization is getting a little old. Whenever someone dares to question the pro-life commitment of the almighty GOP that person is immediately declared to be a pro-choice apologist and a supporter of the Democratic party. Has it ever occurred to anyone that maybe some pro-lifers are tired of waiting around for the GOP??

As long as the majority of pro life Americans remain married to the GOP and demonizing anyone who dares to question that marriage, the GOP can keep right on promising that which it will never need to deliver.

 

[andrewagill]

The GOP had plenty of opportunities to boldly proclaim their allegiance to life, they simply chose to take the easy way out. They had the majority in Congress and the WH more than once. Watch how bold the Democrats are going to be with their majority and think of what the GOP could have done if they had the guts.

The majority of Americans are STILL in favor of legalized abortion, which is why the GOP plays timid. The majority will accept restrictions, but they do not want abortion criminalized. Limitations are not acceptable if you are truly pro-life. Pro life means abortion is never an option, does it not?

Also, the black/white characterization is getting a little old. Whenever someone dares to question the pro-life commitment of the almighty GOP that person is immediately declared to be a pro-choice apologist and a supporter of the Democratic party. Has it ever occurred to anyone that maybe some pro-lifers are tired of waiting around for the GOP??

As long as the majority of pro life Americans remain married to the GOP and demonizing anyone who dares to question that marriage, the GOP can keep right on promising that which it will never need to deliver.

I hate to disagree with you, since I agree with much of what you said, but there are two things that need to be clarified:

• The GOP was not timid. They played hardball with just about every item that came up for a vote. With judicial nominees, they threatened to end the institution of the filibuster. They packed bureaucratic entities with political picks. They passed a midnight bill of attainder for Terri Schiavo.

They were bold with many issues, but they were timid on abortion. I suspect that they think that the majority of Americans would abandon them if abortion were whittled down but not completely eliminated. Perhaps they are right, but this leads me to my other point

• A majority of Americans now oppose abortion. Previous polls had shown a conflicted nation, with results that could be construed for either side. This poll shows that we now have more Americans self-identifying as pro-life than pro-choice.

We’re not nearly out of the woods yet, but for now, we have the upper hand in terms of the people.

We need to take this majority and start moving intelligently to end abortion. Don’t protest where you’re not likely to win converts. Protest where people will be likely to say, ``Hey! Isn’t that Bob? What’s he doing with those pro-life people? I thought they were all whackaloons, but if he’s one of them, maybe I need to think about it.’’

I do agree that the GOP has done a good job in making themselves seem the only choice for those who oppose abortion, and your sentiment is well stated.

 

[mkingdomlvr]

I’m sorry-but by the numbers in the poll you link-76% of those polled believe that abortion should either be legal under any circumstances or legal under certain circumstances. Only 22% of respondents believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. How you’re getting that most Americans are pro-life out of those numbers is a mystery to me. The majority of Americans do NOT oppose abortion based on this poll. If they did, they would not be in favor of it remaining legal.

What we have is a watered down definition of pro-life, not an increase in the number of pro life Americans. Now we’re saying that we’ll call people pro-life if they want abortion restrictions.

 

[andrewagill]

I’m sorry-but by the numbers in the poll you link-76% of those polled believe that abortion should either be legal under any circumstances or legal under certain circumstances. Only 22% of respondents believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. How you’re getting that most Americans are pro-life out of those numbers is a mystery to me. The majority of Americans do NOT oppose abortion based on this poll. If they did, they would not be in favor of it remaining legal.

The poll questions do not help. There are circumstances where action must be taken to save the life of the mother, and this action would have the consequence of causing the baby to die. That gets placed under the phrase ``life of the mother’’ in legislative circles.

It is unclear how many of the 53% of respondents for legal under some circumstances intended that as the circumstance.

 

[Arandur]

May we, therefore, do evil in providing support for those who commit evil acts–such as torture–that good may come–namely the end of abortion?

The candidates who can not be construed to support some intrinsic evil in some way are few and far between. If we fled from our responsibility of discernment and active engagement in public life and instead decided to sit at home because Jesus wasn’t running for office, we would be as morally complicit with the evil as if we had supported it. All it takes for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. This is why many Catholics who sympathize with many Democrat ideas for government work hard to get worthy candidates in their party, but when they fail, they vote in opposition to the Platform of Death that the Democrats advocate so strongly and consistently at the national level.

This is exactly what SHOULD happen. Work to get the right people and ideas in the party you’re more sympathetic to, but do the right thing when it comes to voting day if those good candidates aren’t available and vote against the greatest evil.

I personally believe that the Republicans, while failures on many levels, still have more ideas about government that are true to our nation’s wise foundation and would do great good if implemented. So I’ll work within the Republican party to advance the most social justice. You’re free to work with the Democrats. What scares me is that if Democrats would just become adamantly Pro-Life, they’d probably control government solid for a generation, even though they are wrong on so many other moral issues and I believe most of their ideas about government cause great harm. But if that’s what it took to end abortion, I’d take it happily, for the end of abortion will start to allow society to heal from the desperate cancer of abortion that is killing it.

• The GOP was not timid. They played hardball with just about every item that came up for a vote. With judicial nominees, they threatened to end the institution of the filibuster. They packed bureaucratic entities with political picks. They passed a midnight bill of attainder for Terri Schiavo.

Judges were about abortion. That’s why the Democrats fought so hard against them, and why the Republicans threatened to end the filibuster. Schiavo was about euthanasia, a Pro-Life issue. They earned more credibility on the subject than not.

What we have is a watered down definition of pro-life, not an increase in the number of pro life Americans. Now we’re saying that we’ll call people pro-life if they want abortion restrictions.

You and Andrew and others seem to think that unless someone is totally against abortion in all its forms and actually succeeds at completely outlawing abortion in all its forms across the country, they are worthless. It’s a ridiculous standard that smacks to me of a desire to make excuses to vote on other issues, and is certainly an argument that has been used very commonly (in the last election cycle, especially) by many Catholics to justify voting for Obama. By this argument, it’s not even enough if someone (such as a Republican candidate) is totally pro-life–they must also actually succeed (not just even try hard with anything less than a direct strategy) at outlawing abortion. They must put it up for a straight up vote and they must win.

What I urge you to recognize is that it is difficult for the human mind and understanding to change dramatically. Full repentance in all areas of life at once is as difficult as stopping cold turkey from extreme addiction. Those people who have accepted that abortion should be illegal after the first trimester need only be persuaded a little more that the consequences of the conviction that led them to that idea require that abortion is unacceptable in any circumstance. Those who provide exceptions for rape or incest are similarly close to the truth and just need to be encouraged and persuaded a little more, shown that if they really believe it’s a child, then not even the crime of its father makes it worthy of being murdered.

If you don’t think this slow coming-around is actually how it works, aside from anecdotes, I’ll point you just to those polls again. Yes, the majority of people still believe there are some circumstances in which to permit abortion, but a greater number of them have shifted more and more into the realm of increasing restrictions and identified themselves as Pro-Life. The more we keep the public debate open (and not admit defeat and discourage debate by supporting the Democrat Platform of Death), the more we will gain ground in sowing seeds and changing hearts.

Another example is partial birth abortion. A great majority now think it’s barbaric, having accepted, through long hard debate and education, that the baby really is a BABY at least at some point in the womb. These are changed hearts. Now they must just be shown that the baby is ALWAYS a full human life after conception.

 

[mkingdomlvr]

My point is not GOP vs Democrat. My point is that NEITHER party is going to end abortion and if we want abortion to end we need to stop believing in a political solution. If attitudes have shifted on the subject, (and I’m not convinced they have) then it’s not because of the GOP. If pro-life voters stopped giving their $$ and time to the GOP and instead put that energy and $$ into strictly pro-life action, I believe the attitudinal shift that is necessary to end abortion will happen faster. When attitudes change in the electorate, then the politicians will be forced to change-no matter what party they belong to.

 

[Janet_S]

Also, the black/white characterization is getting a little old. Whenever someone dares to question the pro-life commitment of the almighty GOP that person is immediately declared to be a pro-choice apologist and a supporter of the Democratic party. Has it ever occurred to anyone that maybe some pro-lifers are tired of waiting around for the GOP??

The part about waiting for the GOP I can understand. The part I can’t understand is switching to the Democratic party and expecting something better.

 

[Janet_S]

My point is not GOP vs Democrat. My point is that NEITHER party is going to end abortion and if we want abortion to end we need to stop believing in a political solution. If attitudes have shifted on the subject, (and I’m not convinced they have) then it’s not because of the GOP. If pro-life voters stopped giving their $$ and time to the GOP and instead put that energy and $$ into strictly pro-life action, I believe the attitudinal shift that is necessary to end abortion will happen faster. When attitudes change in the electorate, then the politicians will be forced to change-no matter what party they belong to.

I don’t think you understand pro-lifers. They aren’t that enamored with the GOP. They just have nowhere else to turn since the Democratic party has shut them out.

 

[mkingdomlvr]

The part about waiting for the GOP I can understand. The part I can’t understand is switching to the Democratic party and expecting something better.

Reading here, it seems like many folks still view voting GOP is practically a requirement to be a “real” Catholic and I think that attitude is dangerous.

 

[Garland]

Hi all, Fact the democratic platform has a plank supporting abortion. Fact the GOP has a prolife plank. Fact only the supreme court can undo Roe V Wade. Fact miss sotomayor is not going to try to help the unborn, as she has said it is a right for women, regardless of the other humanbeing involved, “the baby”. Fact, most blacks are democrats, and are about 15% of the population, and one in three babies murdered is black. Fact, hillary clinton sings the praise of margret sanger, founder of planned parenthood, who thought hitler was right. She also said if all Jews, Catholics, and Blacks were anialated, from the planet it would be a much better place. Justice ginsburg has said she voted for Roe V wade because, it was ment to limit the growth of these undesirable humans. Fact, there is no difference in what hitler did and what the democrats support. Mr obama is the most liberal pres that has ever been. With the support of catholics like pelosi, kennedy , kerry, biden, and a host of like minded anti christian zealots seek to force FOCA on us all. Fact, over 50% of catholics voted for this horror. Fact, there is blood on the hands of all who did, and I would be scared to approach HOLY COMMUNION, with this on my soul. Fact, all right are preceeded by the most important one " the right to life" if you play any part in denying this to anyone, you forfiet your own. You can easly pick out the demos. who have replied to this thread by there attacts on the GOP and attempts to justify their support for the party of death. I myself am a democrat, but will not vote that way until the party is given back to the people who support life from conception to natural death. Any other stance is a grave sin. If this offends anyone maybe you need a wakeup call. Be either CATHOLIC or Democratic, you can`t be both under its present circumstance. There is no such thing as a prochoice catholic. “Fr. John Corapi”. His will be done, Garland

 

[mkingdomlvr]

Hi all, Fact the democratic platform has a plank supporting abortion. Fact the GOP has a prolife plank. Fact only the supreme court can undo Roe V Wade. Fact miss sotomayor is not going to try to help the unborn, as she has said it is a right for women, regardless of the other humanbeing involved, “the baby”. Fact, most blacks are democrats, and are about 15% of the population, and one in three babies murdered is black. Fact, hillary clinton sings the praise of margret sanger, founder of planned parenthood, who thought hitler was right. She also said if all Jews, Catholics, and Blacks were anialated, from the planet it would be a much better place. Justice ginsburg has said she voted for Roe V wade because, it was ment to limit the growth of these undesirable humans. Fact, there is no difference in what hitler did and what the democrats support. Mr obama is the most liberal pres that has ever been. With the support of catholics like pelosi, kennedy , kerry, biden, and a host of like minded anti christian zealots seek to force FOCA on us all. Fact, over 50% of catholics voted for this horror. Fact, there is blood on the hands of all who did, and I would be scared to approach HOLY COMMUNION, with this on my soul. Fact, all right are preceeded by the most important one " the right to life" if you play any part in denying this to anyone, you forfiet your own. You can easly pick out the demos. who have replied to this thread by there attacts on the GOP and attempts to justify their support for the party of death. I myself am a democrat, but will not vote that way until the party is given back to the people who support life from conception to natural death. Any other stance is a grave sin. If this offends anyone maybe you need a wakeup call. Be either CATHOLIC or Democratic, you can`t be both under its present circumstance. There is no such thing as a prochoice catholic. “Fr. John Corapi”. His will be done, Garland

Fact: abortion is still legal, even after the party with the pro-life platform had a majority.

 

[Timbothefiveth]

What laws were passed in opposition to abortion during that time?

I think the partial birth abortion ban was. Also, some pro-life justices were nominated. And at least the republicans weren’t actively promoting abortion and funding it overseas

.Agreed.

They had a republican white house, and a republican majority from 2001 until 2006. They could have easily done this:

1. Passed a law outlawing abortion AND

Had it overturned by the supreme court.

Taken away jurisdiction from all federal courts for abortion cases.

Now that they should have done. I’m not sure that the supreme court, however, wouldn’t overturn even that law.

This is why we need to get pro-life justices on the supreme court. This means that when and if the next supreme republican supreme court nominee is considered, you need to right your senators and make sure that justice is pro-life.

 

[mkingdomlvr]

The GOP could have outlawed abortion with a properly crafted piece of legislation. But why should they bother? They’ve already got the pro-life vote and the pro life $$-if they actually outlaw abortion, what will happen to those givers and voters? Without that issue to drive donations and gather support, how will they hold onto that base?

The worst thing that could happen to the GOP is to outlaw abortion.

Yes, I’m a complete cynic when it comes to politics…

 

[Arandur]

Taken away jurisdiction from all federal courts for abortion cases.

Tell me how this would be done. I believe it is far more complicated than you might think. What reasoning would you use to take jurisdiction from the federal courts on abortion? What precedent would that set for the future? Would you get enough votes for whatever problematic reasoning you choose?

Fact: abortion is still legal, even after the party with the pro-life platform had a majority.

And I’ll bet it’s a Fact that neither you nor the great majority of other people who use this red herring ever voted for the “party with the pro-life platform” to put them in the majority or even give them a chance. I call any about whom this is true “hypocrite;” you don’t care about the unborn even enough to give them a chance.

And even if you did vote for them and are disillusioned, did you abdicate your responsibility to continue fighting for the unborn, believing that it was “enough” that you helped get them a small majority? What gave you the idea that simply having the majority for a little while was enough to turn this massive Culture of Death ship around? It doesn’t turn on a dime. Our government doesn’t, either (even with nigh-unprecedented supermajorities in the House and Senate, the Democrats thankfully can’t move as quickly as they’d like on many things).

Abandon these hypocritical, cowardly attempts to justify supporting abortion policy because those who oppose it aren’t completely successful.

 

[andrewagill]

Fact: abortion is still legal, even after the party with the pro-life platform had a majority.

Just an FYI–the guy you responded to seems to like referring to Hitler, Jews and blacks a lot, as well as other hot-button issues like Hillary Clinton. He also called himself a Democrat, but disparages the `Demos.’ and has an extraneous shout out to Fr. John Corapi which doesn’t seem to be related to anything.

This is the hallmark of a forum troll. (am I allowed to call an obvious forum troll a forum troll here?)

 

[Garland]

I guess the troll you refer to is me. Fr. John Corapi said There is no such thing as a prochoice catholic. You cant be both. hitler destroyed eleven million jews catholics, and disabled folks from all walks of life. The democrats and the culture of death they support have destroyed over forty nine million unborn and continue to do more every day. The mexico city policy that came under carter gave our tax money in support of abortion to any country outside our borders that would take it. Reagan stopped it and clinton started it back on his first day in office. Bush stopped it and obama started it back on his second day in office. What are these people afraid of? Maybe a little one will be born to expose satan and his servants for the evil they spread. No chance if they are butchered when they are most vurneable and helpless against the butchers. I refered to hitler to draw a comparison to what happens today with the demos. but really hitler pales in that comparison. There is no way you can justify voteing for people like this and still claim to be Catholic. If calling me names makes you feel better, have at it. Unlike the littleones who are butchered I can and will defend myself. Jesus first last and always, and im sure he would`t vote for the party of death. His will be done. Garland