Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Catholic Voters and 2008 ^ | August 9, 2008 | Russell Shaw

Posted on 08/14/2008 8:36:50 PM PDT by Salvation

Catholic Voters and 2008

August 9th, 2008 by Russell Shaw

Are Douglas Kmiec and Father Michael Pfleger destined to be the representative Catholic voters of the election of 2008? It could be.

Kmiec is the California law professor with conservative, prolife credentials who early this year made a name for himself by publicly declaring his support for Sen. Barack Obama. The Democrat, Kmiec claimed (on what basis is unknown), could be counted on take a reasonable position on abortion.

Father Pfleger is the Chicago pastor who got his 15 minutes of fame during primary season by trashing Hillary Clinton from the pulpit of what was — up till then — Obama’s liberal Protestant church.

Different as they are in many ways, both men were early and vociferous Obama fans who spoke as Catholics.

While I question neither their sincerity nor their right as citizens to support whomever they wish, it’s impossible to ignore the real-life implications of their choice.

Professor Kmiec to the contrary notwithstanding, Obama is an aggressive abortion supporter who promises that as president he’d sign the notorious Freedom of Choice Act making abortion on demand a matter of federal law and who as a member the Illinois legislature opposed a measure requiring that efforts be made to save the lives of children born via botched abortions.

If elected, Obama says, he will nominate to the Supreme Court people who support Roe v. Wade, the court’s 1973 abortion decision. As a senator, he voted against confirming prolife Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito. For good measure, he opposes vouchers for parochial school parents and students and rejects amending the Constitution to bar legal recognition of same-sex marriage. And of course he promises “change.” Change indeed.

Can a Catholic vote in good conscience for someone who holds positions like these? Consider what the American bishops said in their pre-election document Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, published last year:

A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter’s intent is to support that position. In such cases a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil….

There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position may decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons. Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil.

That leaves a small loophole — the possibility that someone might vote for a pro-choice candidate for a proportionate reason outweighing the evil of abortion. But the loophole was effectively closed by Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver. Mulling the question of what might qualify as a “proportionate” reason in a case like the present one, he simply said he couldn’t think of anything that would outweigh the grave moral obligation to work for an end to the evil of legalized abortion that has poisoned American life for over 30 years.

I can think of no better advice for Catholics weighing their choices in this election who truly want to do the right thing than to read-carefully and prayerfully — the American bishops’ document Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship and, if they have time, Archbishop Chaput’s admirable new book on Catholics and politics, Render Unto Caesar.

The first, which is available in English and Spanish, can be ordered from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops at 1-800-235-8722. Archbishop Chaput’s book is published by Doubleday and available in bookstores and at online outlets.


Russell Shaw is a freelance writer from Washington, D.C. You can email him at

TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; Moral Issues; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: 2008; barackobama; catholic; catholiclist; electionpresident; elections
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-22 last
To: IIntense

When bishops don’t teach by disciplining those Catholics who not only publicly support baby butchery but proclaim that baby butchery is perfectly compatable with Church teaching, then I reckon the bishops aren’t doing their jobs. When bishops don’t teach to the best of their ability the truth of the Church about abortion, I reckon it helps the pro-baby butchery crowd.

Your post #14 to my post #12 seems to have a problem, but I’m not sure what it is. If I’m wrong about that, sorry.


21 posted on 08/15/2008 4:46:51 PM PDT by Ransomed (Son of Ransomed says Keep the Faith!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Ransomed
OK, here's the connection.

Your quote: It's the lack of teaching in the form of discipline from bishops and the vatican.

My response: I don't rely on the bishops of the church to tell me how and what to think.

I should have kept my post to just than one sentence.

I'm sure we both agree that enough's been said.

22 posted on 08/15/2008 8:59:11 PM PDT by IIntense (o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-22 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson