Bishops' Document on Voting Refers to Purely Hypothetical and Non-Existent "Candidate Who Takes a Position in Favor of ... Abortion"
During this election season, we keep hearing how "pro-choice" does not mean the same thing as "pro-abortion". And we hear Catholic apologists for Barack Obama - one of the most NARAL-and-Planned-Parenthood-friendly presidential candidates to come down the pike in ... well ... forever - tell us that "Obama is not pro-abortion". And, indeed, the candidate himself, with the eager backing of his sycophants, tells us that "no one is for abortion".
Which leaves me wondering just WHO in the hell the Bishops might have been referring to in the following passage from Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship:
A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion ..., if the voter’s intent is to support that position.Can someone help me out with that? Of all the intrinsic evils out there that a given candidate might support, why did the Bishops choose to focus on addressing a candidate that, if we are to take the claims of our Obama-defending interlocutors seriously, appears to be purely hypothetical?
Let's just say that I remain unconvinced that the Bishops would go to so much trouble and expend so much ink in Faithful Citizenship talking about a type of candidate that doesn't really exist. So, I must conclude that the sort of candidate the Bishops were speaking about in describing "a candidate who takes a position in favor of ... abortion" is, in fact, the self-described "pro-choice" politician.
But, for the record, if you insist on drawing the bogus distinction between "pro-choice" and "pro-abortion", and/or insist that one can be "pro-choice" and still be faithful to Catholic social teaching with respect to abortion, the Bishops have that covered, too:
It is a mistake with grave moral consequences to treat the destruction of innocent human life merely as a matter of individual choice. A legal system that violates the basic right to life on the grounds of choice is fundamentally flawed.And how about this one?
Catholics must never abandon the moral requirement to seek full protection for all human life from the moment of conception until natural death.Or this one?
Our Conference supports laws and policies to protect human life to the maximum degree possible, including constitutional protection for the unborn and legislative efforts to end abortion ...Or this one?
We hope Catholics will ask candidates how they intend to help our nation pursue these important goals:(emphasis added throughout)
• Address the preeminent requirement to protect the weakest in our midst — innocent unborn children — by restricting and bringing to an end the destruction of unborn children through abortion.
Still want to make the claim - contra to the U.S. Catholic Bishops - that the "pro-choice" position is effectively distinct from being "pro-abortion"? Still want to argue that "The dirty little secret is that advocacy of criminalization for abortion has no basis in Catholic ethics ..."?
Go ahead, but don't expect me to take you seriously.
Christopher Blosser points out that the Holy Father doesn't seem to have the same problem connecting the dots between "pro-choice" and pro-abortion as some of our Obama defenders do:
... We have seen this emerge in an acute way in the scandal given by Catholics who promote an alleged right to abortion.(emphasis added)