Abortion Law

[scameter18]

Due to the upcoming elections in November, I have been reviewing the various positions of the candidates, and I noticed that the libertarian party has some candidates that are pro-life, but they tend to say that Roe v. Wade should be repealed, but abortion law should be on a state rather than federal level. I wondered - what is the Church’s position on this? Is it necessary for abortion legality to be decided on a federal level? How would this correlate with this passage from the Catechism:

Socialization also presents dangers. Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative. The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to which “a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to co- ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.”

(1883)

Thank you and God bless.

 

[april32010]

thank you for posting this,i’m afraid that i don’t understand the principle of subsidiarity enough to give you an definite answer. i hope your post prompts some of our more educated members to start a discussion onthe principle of subsidiarity .

 

[RPRPsych]

I think that, when it’s literally a life and death issue, there’s nothing wrong with the Federal government taking a clear stand. But then, I’m not an expert either.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Well I think the federal government has the duty to declare murder illegal across the entire country. We don’t want to have just some of the country call it murder and some of the country call it a “choice”. In this instance the government “supports (society) in case of need and helps to co- ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.”

 

[RPRPsych]

Well I think the federal government has the duty to declare murder illegal across the entire country. We don’t want to have just some of the country call it murder and some of the country call it a “choice”. In this instance the government “supports (society) in case of need and helps to co- ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.”

Thank you for putting it clearly. On this point, the libertarians are wrong, because they value a lesser good (“free will” or “States’ rights”) over a greater evil (the taking of innocent human life.)

 

[sedonaman]

thank you for posting this,i’m afraid that i don’t understand the principle of subsidiarity enough to give you an definite answer. i hope your post prompts some of our more educated members to start a discussion onthe principle of subsidiarity .

“Just as it is gravely wrong to take from individuals what they can accomplish by their own initiative and industry and give it to the community, so also it is an injustice and, at the same time, a grave evil and disturbance of right order to assign to a greater and higher association what lesser and subordinate organizations can do. For every social activity ought of its very nature to furnish help (subsidium) to the members of the body social, and never destroy and absorb them.” – Pope Pius XI, Quadragesimo Anno

An example of this “disturbance of right order” would be a federal program to count dogs in Oxnard, CA.*

*An actual case.