In today’s Washington Times, Erika Bachiochi talks about the overall significance of abortion in the current campaign. First, she gives us one of the most important issues in this campaign: the eventual appointment of Supreme Court justices. More than anything else, this is the presidential power that has the most effect on the abortion debate. And with Chief Justice Rehnquist ailing, you know at least one and up to three seats will be up for grabs in the next term. (Although we were predicting that in the last election, it becomes even more likely now.)
Also, abortion is not as widely popular as some would have you believe. In fact, because the media is so dominated by the pro-abortion mentality, all we see in print or on the air is the false construct of an America where abortion is widely supported by the majority. But in reality only 22 percent of Americans believe that the status quo of abortion on demand is a good thing. Sixty one percent want strict limitations (36 percent want only for rape, incest, and life of the mother cases; 25 percent want a complete ban.) I wish the polls would break it down to include the Catholic posiiton; not legal in cases of rape and incest, but legal in cases where the mother’s life is in danger. (That is the case where the baby’s death is not intended, but is a side effect of saving the mother’s; it’s not the ideal, but it is permissible. I know I’m not expressing the teaching well, but maybe someone else can do a better job.)
And so that leaves us with a stark choice: John Kerry, whose views are extreme and popular only with the fringe, or George W. Bush, who while not perfect on the issue, would at least offer much more hope for the unborn. It’s not even a choice for me.
Hey you guys in Mass. at least make it closer than anyone could have predicted…I’d like to see Kerry do poorly in Mass…..fingers crossed!
Dom—an attempt at a further explanation of the “Catholic position” regarding abortion:
The direct taking of human life through abortion is never permissible; it is always seriously sinful. Anyone who seeks or procures or takes part in an abortion incurs automatic excommunication (latae sententiae).
In some cases, actions taken which are intended to heal the mother (from an illness or disease) may have the secondary, unintended consequence of causing the death of the fetus. To the extent that this death is not intended it is not sinful (see the principle of double effect). The death of the child is a sad by-product of healing the mother, not a “direct taking of human life” per se.
An example: a pregnant mom is diagnosed with uterine cancer. The only means of saving her life is a radical hysterectomy, which would also result in the termination of her baby’s life. She and her doctors may licitly choose the operation, knowing that it will result in the death of the child, although not directly intending it as the rationale for the operation.
Note also, though, that the mother may choose NOT to have the operation, freely giving her life for her baby’s. Truly, no greater love is there than this….
Dom, I’m glad I’m not the only one who isn’t “politically correct.” I’m a big fan of the punch card, or butterfly ballot. If you’re too dumb to punch holes in a card then your vote shouldn’t count.
Another thing that really gets my goat is the need for ballots in languages other than English. When your ancestors and mine came here from their respective countries, they didn’t have the luxury of ballots in Italian or Gaelic. They had to learn English, just like every other American. I don’t think that’s too high a price to pay to live in the greatest country on earth.
Yes indeed, Vote not by muchp:comment_date_gmt>
As a New Englander I’m ashamed today that in all likelihood not one of the six states will give its electoral votes to Bush…with the possible exception of the Maine 2nd congressional district..even NH is now doubtful…But even so a high popular vote for Bush in Kerry country will bode well early in the evening. May God Bless America tonite!
One would think anyone who supports direct abortion legislatively or by some “propaganda campaign” would also be automatically excommunicated(Kerry)?
“Anyone who seeks or procures or takes part in an abortion incurs automatic excommunication (latae sententiae). “
I am not so sure that this is true. Anyway, I just don’t know the answer. For example, suppose that someone is on the birth control pill, with the approval of her husband. Now, it is reported that the birth control pill does result in the abortion of the embryo about 30% of the time. Would this not mean that if someone were taking the birth control pill with the knowledge that the pill does cause the abortion of a newly conceived child about 30% of the time, then that person would be taking part in the abortion of this newly conceived child by the act of taking this pill. Now I have read that some (non-clergy) in the American life league say that if you know what the pill does, you do incur an excommunication. However, I read that in answer to a question on EWTN board, a priest has said that you do not incur an excommunication.
Also, it is my understanding that other forms of mechanical birth control do cause abortions. such as the plastic devices inserted in the female. And, i heard that the number of Catholic ladies using birth control is rather high, which was verified to me after a lady I knew well, delivered a child. This lady was asked by the nurse as to what type of birth control she wanted use after the delivery of the child, and when she said that she did not want to use any form of birth control, the nurse gave her a strange look, and said that everyone that she knew was using birth control after the delivery of a child, and it was not safe for her to do otherwise.
So I don;t think that these ladies using birth control devices which cause abortions are considered to be excommunicated by a lot of people in the Church.
“One would think anyone who supports direct abortion legislatively or by some to claim some kind of ignorance. He knows the truth here and still denies that a nascent human being has a right to life! It would make sense that both heretical religious and laity should (or must?)be excommunicated.