But let’s come at this from a slightly different angle. Let’s say there is a religion that has, as one of its rites or sacraments, human sacrifice. Its adherents
really believe in this. They think it’s a
good thing. Do we just sit back and say “well, we can’t make a law against this, we can’t call it murder in the legal sense, because that is part of their religion, and they need to be free to practice their religion”. Or let’s say that another religion practices ritual child abuse. Are we okay with that?
The latter actually exists — it’s called female mutilation. If that is outlawed,
why is it outlawed? It’s part of their religion, or it might be more accurate to say, it’s part of their culture, but has some religious or quasi-religious aspect. Or let’s take the Jehovah’s Witnesses. One of their children will die without a blood transfusion. Do we just stand back and say “uh-oh, can’t interfere, it’s a question of religious freedom”? That’s how faithful Catholics see abortion — “no,
you might not think it’s wrong, but we see it for what it is, it is murder, and we’re not going to let you get by with it, if we can possibly help it, and we’re going to do everything in our power to make it a crime”.
It’s not a theocratic government to have the laws of a nation formed under the guidance of the churches teachings to prohibit evil from becoming enshrined in law and given legitimacy.
And that’s precisely what the United States has done, up until about fifty years ago. Was this acceptable because Protestants made the laws? And why would it be unacceptable if
Catholics constituted a super-majority?
This is a description of Catholic Theocracy, no matter how much you deny it. It may not be what you intended, but you paint a picture of anti-Catholic rhetoric being fulfilled. It is the logic you are using here. “Until we were strong enough, Catholics could not force morality on others. Now we should.”
Well, where morality intersects the legal sphere, yes, you’re going to see the moral sensibilities of the majority be reflected in the laws of the state, especially where it is a question of ensuring the rights of people other than the actor. Paul Blanshard
et al were not entirely wrong, to predict that a Catholic majority would result in at least some acts, contrary to Catholic morality, becoming crimes as well. Have not this country’s laws, at least up until recent years, broadly reflected a Protestant moral sense? And was that acceptable, or was that
not acceptable?
