The more Catholics know, the clearer the choice to vote Bush

IN 1856, an American Catholic heading for the polls faced a no-brainer: Whatever you do, don’t cast your ballot for the Know Nothing Party.

The “know nothings” were part of the thriving Nativist movement, driven by anti-Catholicism and fear of immigration. Their platform promised, “war to the hilt, on political Romanism” and “hostility to all Papal influences.” As a Democratic legislator from Boston, who is also a Catholic, the following fact is especially troubling to me: By 1855, the governor of Massachusetts and all but two representatives in the Commonwealth’s House were Know Nothings.

Fortunately for Catholics and immigrants, the Know Nothing candidate, former President Millard Fillmore, was soundly defeated. In succeeding Presidential elections, Catholics traded their allegiances between the parties. When considering core values issues, the choice for Catholics has not always been clear. But this year is a dramatic exception.

The Democrats offer Sen. John Kerry, a professed Catholic. You may have heard that Kerry’s own Democratic colleagues, by some creative measure, call him the “most Catholic” senator. That’s like calling Tony Soprano a devout Catholic because he shows up at Mass most Sundays and throws some bills in the collection plate. Catholics know better.

For 20 years, on matters most fundamental to Catholics, Kerry has been consistently wrong. Kerry was one of only 14 senators to vote against the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. This year, he opposed the federal marriage amendment, which would give the American people a voice in the definition of marriage, rather than leave it to the whims of activist judges like those in Massachusetts. Kerry has even castigated church leaders for weighing-in on the marriage issue, calling it “inappropriate” and a breach of the “separation of church and state.”

In his first Senate campaign, Kerry promised that he would vote against “any restrictions on age, consent, funding restrictions, or any law to limit access to abortion.” That’s a promise he’s kept. He is among the most fervent supporters of abortion in the Senate, repeatedly voting for taxpayer funding of abortions, against parental notification for a minor’s abortion, and against a ban on partial birth abortion. He voted against the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which treats a violent crime against a pregnant woman as a crime against two people—the unborn and the mother. Even in Massachusetts, Kerry’s positions are far from the mainstream.

Kerry is the first Presidential candidate ever to receive the endorsement of Planned Parenthood. The group described electing Kerry as “crucial to preserving access to abortion.” To show his thanks, Kerry pledged to nominate to the Supreme Court “only supporters of abortion rights.”

Despite this record, Kerry states that he personally disapproves of abortion — even that “life begins at conception” — but that this is simply an “article of faith” for him, which he would not impose on others. Catholics with a little catechism and logic know better. They know that life is a basic human right, trumping all others, and that we must protect it through humane public policy. Kerry rejects this fundamental value, and his frequent declaration that he “was an altar boy” is not enough to dispel Catholics’ concerns.

In contrast, President Bush speaks of supporting the “culture of life” — the call to “uphold and affirm the dignity of every person, rich and poor, able and disabled, born and unborn” — and he has backed his words with action.

In 1960, a Democratic senator from Massachusetts inspired many first, second, and third generation Catholic immigrants. John Kennedy’s election was a final blow to the Know Nothings and their descendants. But, in those days, while Democrats and Republicans were debating the general direction of the nation, there was broad consensus on the central cultural issues. Now that the consensus has vanished, we must choose carefully. And while our faith should not direct our choice, it should certainly inform our choice.

This year, with another Democratic senator from Massachusetts running for President, many more Catholics will be avoiding the Democratic lever because the Democratic nominee shows little regard for what matters most to Catholics. This year, the more Catholics know, the clearer the choice becomes.

Brian P. Golden is a three-term Democrat representing Boston in the Massachusetts House of Representatives. He is a major in the Army Reserves and served on active duty with the U.S. peacekeeping mission in Bosnia and at the Pentagon during Operation Iraqi Freedom.

A CATHOLIC VOTER’S GUIDE -
THE FIVE NON-NEGOTIABLE ISSUES
These five current issues concern actions that are intrinsically evil and must never be promoted by the law. Intrinsically evil actions are those which fundamentally conflict with the moral law and can never be deliberately performed under any circumstances. It is a serious sin to deliberately endorse or promote any of these actions, and no candidate who really wants to advance the common good will support any action contrary to the non-negotiable principles involved in these issues.

1. Abortion

The Church teaches that, regarding a law permitting abortions, it is "never licit to obey it, or to take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or to vote for it" (EV 73). Abortion is the intentional and direct killing of an innocent human being, and therefore it is a form of homicide.

The unborn child is always an innocent party, and no law may permit the taking of his life. Even when a child is conceived through rape or incest, the fault is not the child's, who should not suffer death for others' sins.

2. Euthanasia

Often disguised by the name "mercy killing," euthanasia also is a form of homicide. No person has a right to take his own life, and no one has the right to take the life of any innocent person.

In euthanasia, the ill or elderly are killed, by action or omission, out of a misplaced sense of compassion, but true compassion cannot include intentionally doing something intrinsically evil to another person (cf. EV 73).

3. Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Human embryos are human beings. "Respect for the dignity of the human being excludes all experimental manipulation or exploitation of the human embryo" (CRF 4b).

Recent scientific advances show that often medical treatments that researchers hope to develop from experimentation on embryonic stem cells can be developed by using adult stem cells instead. Adult stem cells can be obtained without doing harm to the adults from whom they come. Thus there is no valid medical argument in favor of using embryonic stem cells. And even if there were benefits to be had from such experiments, they would not justify destroying innocent embryonic humans.

4. Human Cloning

"Attempts . . . for obtaining a human being without any connection with sexuality through 'twin fission,' cloning, or parthenogenesis are to be considered contrary to the moral law, since they are in opposition to the dignity both of human procreation and of the conjugal union" (RHL I:6).

Human cloning also involves abortion because the "rejected" or "unsuccessful" embryonic clones are destroyed, yet each clone is a human being.

5. Homosexual "Marriage"

True marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Legal recognition of any other union as "marriage" undermines true marriage, and legal recognition of homosexual unions actually does homosexual persons a disfavor by encouraging them to persist in what is an objectively immoral arrangement.

"When legislation in favor of the recognition of homosexual unions is proposed for the first time in a legislative assembly, the Catholic lawmaker has a moral duty to express his opposition clearly and publicly and to vote against it. To vote in favor of a law so harmful to the common good is gravely immoral" (UHP 10).

ABBREVIATIONS

CCC Catechism of the Catholic Church

CPL Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Notes on Some Questions Regarding the Participation of Catholics in Political Life

CRF Pontifical Council for the Family, Charter of the Rights of the Family

EV John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae (The Gospel of Life)

RHL Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on Respect for Human Life in Its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation

UHP Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Considerations regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons

Voter's Guide for Serious Catholics BUSH FOR CATHOLICS

Catholic Ping - let me know if you want on/off this list

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.