Monday, May 12, 2008

Deal Hudson on "How Obama's Catholics Will Dodge the Infanticide Question"

(Hat tip: Custos Fidei)

Deal Hudson writes today at InsideCatholic on the Obama Catholic (or "Obamatholic"?) approach to abortion:

When Obama's Catholic supporters attacked Catholic League president Bill Donohue for his criticism of their candidate, they did not mention Obama's support for infanticide.

The question will inevitably arise for the distinguished group of Catholics supporting Obama as to how they can defend his preference for infanticide in cases where a child survives a botched abortion. The fury Obama's Catholics vented toward Donohue will only force them to face that question sooner than they may have expected.

It's clear to me how it will be answered: It won't. Obama's Catholics are already attempting to reframe the abortion issue in their favor. They will do everything they can to divert attention from the fact that their candidate is actually the most extreme pro-abortion advocate ever to be nominated by a political party for president of the United States.

The letter to Donohue reveals the arguments Obama's Catholics will use to evade the question of infanticide ...

[Read the whole thing]
My Comments:
In other words, as I noted last week, the approach by the Obamatholics, as evidenced by folks like Douglas Kmiec, Gerald Campbell, "Catholic Democrats", et al, is NOT to say they support Obama IN SPITE OF his abortion position (as Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship seems to require), but is to "BAPTIZE" Obama's abortion position: (1) so that "pro-choice" is suddenly an acceptable position for Catholics to support (rather than acknowledging it for what it really is: political support for legalized abortion-on-demand); and (2) to give the impression that supporting Obama will actually FURTHER the pro-life cause.

(See also Christopher Blosser's coverage of this issue.)

However, those Catholics who support Obama and want to remain faithful to the teachings of their Church would be much better served if they all thought like this blogger.

Obamatholics in search of their moral compass need to call M.Z. Forrest.

Previous Pro Ecclesia posts on this subject:
Obama Catholics Blast Bill Donohue, Blame Conservatives for Failing to End Abortion

Kmiec's Dishonesty [UPDATED]

The Curt Jester: "Shameless Garment" [UPDATED]

Labels: , , , , , ,


At 5/12/2008 9:19 AM, Blogger Paul, just this guy, you know? said...

Well, yes, of course you're right Jay, and why shouldn't they? As I keep pointing out on my own blog, it's perfectly OK to dissent from Church teaching on abortion.

They've gotten tired of fighting the abortion fight, the other side is sexier, more appealing, and there's no cost (to them) for giving in. Why on earth shouldn't they surrender the culture war and just give in?

So if the GOP tells us we can't abolish abortion until we've won the war on terror, and the Democrats tell us we can't abolish abortion until we've won the war on poverty, well, why wouldn't they prefer to put abortion on the back burner for poverty instead of for war?

So while Republican pro-lifers excoriate Republican candidates and officeholders when they fail to toe the pro-life line, Democrat "pro-lifers" apologize for Democrat candidates who openly advocate and work for extended abortion rights.

But hey, they are consistently orthodox, unlike us. We know this because they tell us so.

At 5/12/2008 9:58 AM, Blogger Donald R. McClarey said...

"So if the GOP tells us we can't abolish abortion until we've won the war on terror"

Paul, I would appreciate a citation for any member of the GOP who has ever said that. Actually I think the Bush administration has accomplished a lot against abortion, as Christopher Blosser has amply noted at the url below, considering the fact that the Democrat Party, with certain honorable exceptions, behaves as it is is a wholly owned subsidiary of Planned Parenthood.

At 5/12/2008 10:34 AM, Blogger Paul, just this guy, you know? said...

Donald, certainly President Bush has been the most pro-life president we've had, with honorable efforts and notable successes towards reducing the number of legal abortions. But even he never promised to end abortion; he promised to do what he's done, try to reach common ground where possible to end forms of abortion most people find repellant. His prime example of this, and his most notable success of course, was partial-birth abortion.

But were you not watching the same GOP primary race I was? Don't you remember why they told us we had to accept Giuliani as the inevitable nominee? Remember how CPAC left abortion off the poll of topics when they asked attendees what was the most important issue to them? Remember how quickly Republicans for Choice endorsed McCain after Giuliani dropped out? I certainly lost count of the number of times I was told that the war on terror was the single overriding issue of this election.

I've written about this on my blog, but the main point is, quite a few pro-lifers were led to feel that the party was ready to throw us under the bus, and some of us haven't forgotten that.

At 5/12/2008 12:38 PM, Blogger Donald R. McClarey said...

"Don't you remember why they told us we had to accept Giuliani as the inevitable nominee?"

This was the prognostication of commentators who understand Repulican primaries as well as a pig understands penance. The response of the GOP voters was to make certain that His Honor has lots of free time to write his memoirs.

As to Republicans for Choice, I have a url below to their site:

Ann Stone's vantiy PAC has apparently not endorsed McCain, but they think they may be able to work with him. In that I think they are as delusional as pro-lifers who will vote for Obama. Abortion has rarely been a big issue for McCain, but he has always voted pro-life on abortion and I think he understands the need to keep pro-lifers on his side.

There has always been a pro-abort contingent in the Republican party, but they have been largely neutered as a result of pro-life Republicans. Guiliani's fate indicates once again which side calls the shots in the Republican party and it is not those who favor legalized abortion.

At 5/12/2008 3:03 PM, Blogger Paul, just this guy, you know? said...

Donald, I would like to invite you to come to Illinois and say that.

At 5/12/2008 3:07 PM, Blogger Jay Anderson said...


Donald lives in Illinois. Just FYI.

At 5/12/2008 4:23 PM, Blogger Paul, just this guy, you know? said...

In that case, I'm sure Donald sympathizes with my frustration.

Where in Illinois?

At 5/12/2008 5:12 PM, Blogger Donald R. McClarey said...

Dwight, Illinois Paul! Don't get me started on our GOP, a party that manages to hand Obama a US Senate seat by putting up against him the deranged Alan Keyes, who I voted for, and who ran the worst state-wide campaign I have ever seen. Then we have the feat of nominating Oberweis to lose the seat of Hastert that had been in Republican hands for the past seven decades. Then we have the unlamented Judy Barr Topinka who yawned her way through a gubernatorial campaign that gave a second term to the most corrupt governor in Illinois history. Of course who can forget prisoner George Ryan, second most corrupt governor and convicted felon, who did his best to destroy the Republican party in this state. I wish the problem in the Illinois GOP was primarily ideological, but fundamentally our problem is that we have a state party filled with corrupt grafters who would much rather lose elections than bring to the fore reform Republicans who might win and clean house. I also blame rank and file Republicans, including myself, who for too long have allowed this sisuation to fester as the party wanders from electoral disaster to elector disaster. I also blame former Senator Fitzgerald who prefered quiet retirement rather than fighting it out with the powers that be in the party and instituting the type of reforms necessary for the party to win and, more important, to deserve to win.

At 5/13/2008 8:38 PM, Blogger Paul, just this guy, you know? said...

Don't get me started on our GOP...

Hmm... I appear to have gotten him started.

At 5/16/2008 11:55 AM, Blogger Radical Catholic Mom said...

Sure Jay, this must be similar to McCain Catholics who baptize the holiness of human experimentation such as "embryonic stem cell research." Or the belief in the sacredness of torture. Be careful what you say. The Big Fat Beam in the Republican Party may make you stumble.

At 5/16/2008 12:03 PM, Blogger Jay Anderson said...

"Be careful what you say. The Big Fat Beam in the Republican Party may make you stumble."

Radical Catholic Mom,

You might be right if I were a McCain supporter. Or a Republican. Or had excused McCain's support for ESCR.

Unfortunately for your argument, none of those things happen to be the case. In fact, I have been extremely critical of McCain on this blog, ESPECIALLY regarding his support for ESCR (and have said I can't support him unless and until he reverses course), and have taken Catholic McCain supporters - including those at National Catholic Register - to task for their cheerleading on behalf of McCain.

As for torture, I will give McCain the credit he deserves for standing up against the Bush Administration and condemning torture in no uncertain terms. So, I'm not sure what your argument there is about.

At any rate, I will continue to call them as I see them when it comes to Catholics sacrificing the teachings of their Faith in order to promote the agenda of any politician, right or left.

At 5/16/2008 10:56 PM, Blogger Radical Catholic Mom said...

I apologize, Jay. I assumed you are a Republican. The sad part is that many who attack Catholic Obama supporters ARE supporting the ESCR candidate.

Pro-lifers are not winning this election.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

hit counter for blogger