What can be said about these scenarios of potential material cooperation with evil? Are they material cooperation or not?
- You are an electrician working for a public power company. You are sent out on a job to restore power to a business after a thunderstorm. When you get to the business you discover it is an abortion clinic. You also learn from the employees of the clinic that if power is restored this morning, then several scheduled abortions will be performed that afternoon. Because of the storm, there is no one else available to do the job right now. So if you don’t do it, it will not get done today. Should you refuse to do the work?
- You are a city bus driver. You recognize a passenger as an abortion doctor who says he is on his way to work. Should you refuse drive the bus any further? Should you ask that the doctor leave the bus? Or should you drive him to his work? (This is similar to the “drive my friend to the abortion clinic” example that is often given to illustrate material cooperation, except that your actions in this case would be in the completion of your normal employment duties, rather than as an individual, and that is the key factor I want to explore in #1 and #2.)
- In voting for Drain Commissioner, the candidate you feel would do the best job you happen to know is also pro-abortion rights, even though he does not publicly speak about it or is likely to be able to apply his view in the commission of his office. Can you vote for him? If you do, is that material cooperation? After all, he might go on to become governor. (The key factor being explored here is probability as opposed to certainty. The #1 and #2 it is virtually certain your actions will result in evil, while here there is only a small chance your actions will have that result.)
Welcome to CAF!
There was a situation in Texas in which the local businessmen refused service to a new abortion clinic that was in the process of being built. The process was delayed, for a time, but the Planned Parenthood officials (I’m pretty sure it was that organization that gets our taxpayer money) found out-of-towners to do the work – electrical, plumbing, etc . . . I applauded those who withheld their expertise and supported the choice for life.
In considering your examples, I would say that case #1 is definitly an example of material cooperation in evil if the electrician performs the task of restoring the power. You might say he was just doing his job. Well, so were the Nazis.
As for case #2, the bus driver has a load of passengers who would not get to their destination if he refused to drive the bus on its route. So his primary intention is to drive everyone safely on the given route. Now if the abortionist were the only passenger, it would be an act of courage to refuse to drive him to the killing center, but he would most likely lose his job.
Concerning case #3, knowingly voting for anyone who is for taking the lives of the innocent would be an immoral act, if there is another candidate to vote for who is pro-life, or at least, in most cases. As mentioned, the candidate could eventually become the governor or even a Senator.
In another scenario, a young pro-life pharmacist has to make a decision whether or not to fill a prescription for an abortifacient drug (one that will take the life of a human being in embryonic stage), such as RU-486 or the “morning-after pill” or elle. Should the pharmacist fill the prescription? In my opinion, the pharmacist should have explained his/her reticence to the manager of said store before being hired so that accomodations might have been made. Another pharmacist would be filling the prescription without a scene occuring. Although the pharmacist would have kept his/her integrity, still, a baby would not have been prevented from killing, but it wouldn’t be on the pharmacist’s conscience.
) to you on saying no.