May 18, 2013

September 9, 2008


Two Roman Catholic Bishops Respond To Catholics In Public Office And The Issue Of Abortion

From here: 

Abortion is a foundational issue; it is not an issue like housing policy or the price of foreign oil. It always involves the intentional killing of an innocent life, and it is always, grievously wrong. If, as Sen. Biden said, “I’m prepared as a matter of faith [emphasis added] to accept that life begins at the moment of conception,” then he is not merely wrong about the science of new life; he also fails to defend the innocent life he already knows is there.

As the senator said in his interview, he has opposed public funding for abortions. To his great credit,he also backed a successful ban on partial-birth abortions. But his strong support for the 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade and the false “right” to abortion it enshrines, can’t be excused by any serious Catholic. Support for Roe and the “right to choose” an abortion simply masks what abortion is, and what abortion does.

Roe is bad law. As long as it stands, it prevents returning the abortion issue to the states where it belongs, so that the American people can decide its future through fair debate and legislation.In his Meet the Press interview, Sen. Biden used a morally exhausted argument that American Catholics have been hearing for 40 years: i.e., that Catholics can’t “impose” their religiously based views on the rest of the country. But resistance to abortion is a matter of human rights, not religious opinion. And the senator knows very well as a lawmaker that all law involves the imposition of some people’s convictions on everyone else. That is the nature of the law.


Share this story:


Recent Related Posts

Comments

Facebook comments are closed.

4 comments

RC Bishops Chaput and Conley said:  “American Catholics have allowed themselves to be bullied into accepting the destruction of more than a million developing unborn children a year.”

I would replace “American Catholics” with “American Christians”.

They also said:  “Other people have imposed their “pro-choice” beliefs on American society without any remorse for decades.”

It is the epitome of hypocrisy and disingenuousness to claim that a morally reprehensible interpretation of the Constitution by the U. S. Supreme Court does not impose someone’s religious view on others.  In plain language, it is a damned lie.

All U. S. taxpayers are forced, under penalty of criminal prosecution and jail time, to financially support the willful taking of human life, compounded by the fact that the life taken is usually being taken for the convenience of the killer and the victim is helpless, totally and absolutely helpless, and unable to defend itself.  If Christians are called to defend the helpless and those unable to defend themselves, can there be a better example of our failure to do so?

The “I don’t want to impose my beliefs on anyone else” argument is an outrageous, damned lie.  It is used to provide license to murder over a million babies each year.  If that is not mass infanticide, what is?

The argument against stem cell research is persuasive but not mature.  The science is still in the process of scientific and moral evaluation, in my view.  The argument against murdering babies by calling it “freedom of choice” is absolute; there is no basis for reasonable doubt, scientific or moral, when life begins.

While it needed no such reinforcement, my decision to vote against those who advocate killing babies, even if the person(s) I am voting for favor(s) some form of stem cell research and has numerous other warts and foibles, my commitment to that decision is even stronger than before.  If that is practicing moral relativity, I confess, without regret or remorse.

Thanks be to God for Bishops Chaput and Conley.

[1] Posted by Ol' Bob on 9-9-2008 at 06:11 PM · [top]

A politician may chose to support the pro-abortion position due to party pressure, or surveying all the votes they expect to get, or they may simply really deeply feel that the right to an abortion is a good thing and needs to be defended.

Any politician has a right to those ideas and to support those policies.

However, such politicians do NOT have a right to expect that all is normal in their Catholic Parish, letting them continue to receive Communion.

Decisions have consequences. 

If you stand for a policy, then stand for it honestly and forthrightly and take the lumps that comes with making a stand.  If a person holds to a policy that is at odds with the clear theology of their faith, then that person needs to separate himself from participating in the life of his faith group. 

You cannot have it both ways.

Any Catholic politician who is on the pro-abortion side of the equation, ought not present themselves for communion.  If they do present themselves, they should be refused by the priest. 

It is that simple. 

For the priest to administer the communion to an unrepentent sinner, is to demean both the sacrament, but the priest’s ministry.

Speaker Pelosi, Sen. Biden, Sen. Kennedy or ANY Catholic politician who is on the pro-abortion side of the equation, are not in a fit moral state to receive communion.  Unless they publically repent of this public policy, they will continue to be in no fit state to fully participate in the Mass, by receiving Communion.

After all, for these Catholic pols, it is only a “MATTER of CHOICE” isn’t it?

[2] Posted by Scotsreb on 9-9-2008 at 08:23 PM · [top]

I wonder whether these “Christian” politicians who refuse to impose their morality on abortion on others would also have taken the position that many 19th Century religious leaders took in refusing to impose their moral position on slavery on those who owned slaves.  I am sad to say that I am a member of denomination that repents loudly, publicly, and often of our sin of racism but cannot be persuaded to drop its membership in the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. As though it were better to kill the innocent than enslave them. And, of course, abortion is really racist since over 60% of the babies killed by abortionists are black.  What can one call the slaughter of over 600,000 black babies each year but genocide?  This makes it very difficult to speak about my denomination’s commitment to “social justice” with a straight face. May God have mercy upon our souls when our churches, speaking for us as Christians, take such “moral” positions.

[3] Posted by ABQ Methodist on 9-9-2008 at 08:46 PM · [top]

It is now being reported that two more bishops—Cardinal Justin Rigali (Chairman of the U.S. Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities) and Bishop William Lori (Chairman of the U.S. Bishops’ Committee on Doctrine) have issued a statement taking issue with Senator Biden’s Comments on Meet the Press.

[4] Posted by slcath on 9-9-2008 at 11:45 PM · [top]

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.

Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.