I
Isilzha
Guest
Personally Opposed?
http://www.catholicexchange.com/vm/images/29641_lead_image.jpg
http://www.catholicexchange.com/ius/vm/spacer.gif There is a reason why we are told that it is out of bounds to “impute motives” to those who disagree with us: We can’t read minds. It is wrong to assume that people do not mean what they say and are motivated by dishonest motives or a hidden agenda, absent some evidence to the contrary.
http://www.catholicexchange.com/ius/vm/ahd_pinline.gifWhich is why we shouldn’t, for example, reach for labels such as “appeaser,” “war-monger” and “racist” just because someone takes the other side in a discussion of current events.
That said, there are times when we have no choice but to consider the possibility that we are dealing with a huckster looking to pull the wool over our eyes. If we did not, we would end up falling for every miracle cure for baldness and nearsightedness that they push in the infomercials on late night radio.
So, bad form or not, I am going to engage in a bit of “motive imputing” in regard to the “personally opposed, but” crop of Catholic politicians and commentators who have been supporting “pro-choice” Catholic politicians for the past 25 years. Here goes: I don’t believe them any longer. Sorry: I don’t think they are as “personally opposed” to abortion as they say. I am convinced that they harbor serious doubts about the Church’s teaching on abortion, but, for a variety of reasons (mainly, but not exclusively, political), do not want to admit it in public. The favorable reaction of Mario Cuomo and Fr. Richard McBrien to an op-ed column in the New York Times in mid June by former Sen. John Danforth, now an ordained Episcopalian minister, was the clincher for me. The “personally opposed but” crowd is conning us.
Rest of Story
http://www.catholicexchange.com/vm/images/29641_lead_image.jpg
http://www.catholicexchange.com/ius/vm/spacer.gif There is a reason why we are told that it is out of bounds to “impute motives” to those who disagree with us: We can’t read minds. It is wrong to assume that people do not mean what they say and are motivated by dishonest motives or a hidden agenda, absent some evidence to the contrary.
http://www.catholicexchange.com/ius/vm/ahd_pinline.gifWhich is why we shouldn’t, for example, reach for labels such as “appeaser,” “war-monger” and “racist” just because someone takes the other side in a discussion of current events.
That said, there are times when we have no choice but to consider the possibility that we are dealing with a huckster looking to pull the wool over our eyes. If we did not, we would end up falling for every miracle cure for baldness and nearsightedness that they push in the infomercials on late night radio.
So, bad form or not, I am going to engage in a bit of “motive imputing” in regard to the “personally opposed, but” crop of Catholic politicians and commentators who have been supporting “pro-choice” Catholic politicians for the past 25 years. Here goes: I don’t believe them any longer. Sorry: I don’t think they are as “personally opposed” to abortion as they say. I am convinced that they harbor serious doubts about the Church’s teaching on abortion, but, for a variety of reasons (mainly, but not exclusively, political), do not want to admit it in public. The favorable reaction of Mario Cuomo and Fr. Richard McBrien to an op-ed column in the New York Times in mid June by former Sen. John Danforth, now an ordained Episcopalian minister, was the clincher for me. The “personally opposed but” crowd is conning us.
Rest of Story