On the grave obligations of Catholics who voted for Obama despite his positions on the life issues

November 5, 2008 § 21 Comments

Now that liberal Catholics have gotten what they wanted, I’m looking forward to seeing the constant stream of loud, relentless, and unequivocal denunciation of the legality of abortion from them. The obligatory constant, unrelenting public criticism of the Obama administration’s abortion and embryonic stem cell research policies by Doug Kmiec is going to be particularly edifying to see.

(Cross-posted)

Tagged:

§ 21 Responses to On the grave obligations of Catholics who voted for Obama despite his positions on the life issues

  • discalcedyooper says:

    I believe opposing abortion, even harmful abortion policies advanced by Democrats, is a grave obligation for all people. It is an act of bad faith to assume that such opposition wouldn’t be forthcoming when policy proposals are brought forward, although that would tend to confirm your thesis of personal corruption, which is an act of bad faith on my part.

  • Anonymous says:

    “It is an act of bad faith to assume that such opposition wouldn’t be forthcoming”Oh, come on…

  • Bob says:

    “The obligatory constant, unrelenting public criticism of the Obama administration’s abortion and embryonic stem cell research policies by Doug Kmeic is going to be particularly edifying to see.”I like to see it too, but I think this is wishful thinking. If Kmeic ever does this, please be sure to call our attention to it.I believe that FOCA is going to be the first test of this.

  • daveheitz says:

    Does anyone here know, did Kmiec even once mention FOCA when defending his endorsement? He certainly doesn’t in < HREF="http://www.slate.com/id/2203800/entry/2203878/" REL="nofollow">his article on Slate today<>.

  • c matt says:

    The onus is particularly on those alleged pro-life democrat elected officials to actually act pro-life. I wonder how many of them will oppose FOCA (we are watching you, Casey Jr.).

  • Drogo says:

    Zippy,This is a little off topic.First, I apologize for the use of the word “damn” before your name a few days ago. I should not have been so flip and comfortable with a troubling colloquialism.Second, Thank you for speaking clearly and reasonably in the midst of this clouded election. I regret not joining the fray more openly.Third, the problems of a McCain vote should not be forgotten. To do so will make us gullible party hacks who think any who knows pro-life verbiage is a de facto possessor of that virtue. I think those who voted for McCain should examine their conscience and repent of their cooperation with evil.Bill Haley

  • zippy says:

    The way I see it, the publicly visible measure of how serious Kmeic and those who made his decision were, will be manifest in their loud, constant, unequivocal denunciations of the murderous regime of legalized abortion – or its lack – from here forward.Obviously it isn’t enough to “argue the delta” – that is, to argue only when new policies are proposed. Catholics who voted for Obama have a grave obligation to vociferously and constantly lobby for him to reverse the legalized abortion regime, in clear, public, and obvious terms. They have, in my view, a grave obligation to lobby for Supreme Court justices who can be expected to reverse <>Roe<>, etc — independent of how much they think their guy is willing to listen.I’m watching. Far more importantly, Christ is watching, as He stands in a sea of the victims of abortion.

  • zippy says:

    Bill, I was planning this post independent of who won, though I’d be admonishing McCain supporters rather than Obama supporters had things gone the other way. As for those who voted and lost, I think there is plenty of time for people to reflect on and further develop their views of cooperation with evil as it pertains to democratic elections; but in terms of publicly visible relentless opposition to the very things which were problemmatic about their candidate there is a unique obligation falling on the winners, it seems to me, just as in the case of a war there is a unique obligation of a party to that war to minimize the damage caused. IOW we’ve exited the <>jus ad bellum<> electoral stage and entered the <>jus in bello<> stage; and the participants had better be doing everything they can to minimize the damage of the war they started.

  • Drogo says:

    Zippy,Yes, we must pay attention to the jus in bello stage.Yet, if we ignore the causa belli, compromise and cooperation with evil on the part of many, the sin cannot be rooted out.We ignored the causa belli for the jus in bello during Clinton years and got a Bush who has done little. Then we were handed a McCain. We must be careful never to forget the compromise with evil the Republicans have made so as not to have a Giuliani or Ridge next.More and more I see the Republicans as the greater of the evils. The Democrats are openly evil as were the Romans. The Republicans pretend to be good and, thereby, are the modern day Pharisees. Who has the greater sin?

  • zippy says:

    Oh, I’m not suggesting that a continuing conversion on the part of <>all of us<> is unnecessary, Bill. That is just a much broader subject than what I am addressing specifically with this post. Any Obama supporter who tells the same story four years from now and has not spent this coming four years relentlessly and publicly opposing, specifically, the legality of procured abortion, is a fraud and a cause of scandal.

  • e. says:

    Zippy & Bill,As you would have it, McCain lost.Why go on when your candidate won?And if Obama wasn't your candidate, then who the heck did you expect to win instead of Obama who had any chance of preventing the kind of devestation to Pro-Life that you will now have the pleasure of witnessing?

  • zippy says:

    e:Give it a rest.

  • e. says:

    Zippy:My point exactly. I agree. Thanks.

  • JohnMcG says:

    Zippy’s entire argument has been that we should not have regarded either of these candidates as our candidate.I think what we have to repent for is not a failure to sufficiently support McCain, but failure to promote a viable candidate we would be proud to have as our candidate.

  • Scott W. says:

    Must…resist…sour…grapes

  • Kevin Jones says:

    “did Kmiec even once mention FOCA when defending his endorsement?”From Kmiec’s NCReporter essay of Oct. 31:“the Senator’s promise to sign the so-called Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) which has been sitting around Congress for two decades or so.There is much dispute over FOCA’s intended effect. Its opponents (including me) argue that it will roll back important policies like waiting periods; its supporters (including the Senator) think it more a non-discrimination principle, allowing restrictions on abortion but only when they exist on other comparable medical procedures. Either way, is this an independent reason for Catholics to disregard Obama’s commitment to social justice?Not really. At the Democratic convention, leading members of the House and Senate publicly expressed the view that FOCA is so deeply flawed – some scholars believing it unconstitutional and most lawmakers finding it unacceptable as a matter of policy – that it will never reach the president’s desk. This is a fact that has some plausibility given its history, but of course, one that may change with the composition of the new Congress. This is more fairly an issue regarding the election of others, and not primarily Obama or McCain.”

  • e. says:

    John McG:“…failure to promote a viable candidate we would be proud to have as our candidate.”Well, I don’t think any future candidate could ever fulfill my idea of an ideal candidate that I would be proud of.That person would have to be principally, among other things, a devout Catholic (which means Pro-life).There is also the issue of that person being of a certain conservative nature (not necessarily Bucklian, mind you).At any rate, I am leaning more monarchist in my tendencies than anything at this point given past and upcoming future events.

  • JohnMcG says:

    I pray (and will work to ensure) he’s right.Nevertheless, that is perhaps the greatest exercise in twisted logic I have ever seen — Obama supports a bill that is so bad that there is no chance it will get to his desk, so that is not a reason not to support him.I guess it’d be OK if a candidate supported re-instituting slavery, or the killing of first-born infants, since those would have no chance of passing as well…

  • Scott W. says:

    <>Nevertheless, that is perhaps the greatest exercise in twisted logic I have ever seen — Obama supports a bill that is so bad that there is no chance it will get to his desk, so that is not a reason not to support him.<>I see it will take me a heroic effort to feel bad for the guy if the Obama administration decides to tell him to go jump in a lake.

  • Anonymous says:

    Please read at The Curt Jester (by Guillermo Bustamante on November 5, 2008 7:44 PM) “The USCCB meets soon to discuss “practical and pastoral implications of political support for abortion.” Will the scandal of Sen. Biden be addressed? Probably not…”Unless… WE square off the USCCB.How? Repeating: “Is not possible to serve two Lords…” We must study the defeat in Colorado of the abortion ban, BECAUSE THE USCCB INCOMPETENT CATHECHESIS, lighting this scientific fact-open-market:WOMBS FOR RENT (Charity: call a spade, spade, JP II).Case in point: if one of the less confused in the Gospel of Life (JP II), but obsessed in demeaning himself putting as an equal to “a don nadie” (nobody) little-professor Kmiec (elevated by most Catholic media???), and afraid to ruffle politicians feathers as Abp. Cheput…Well, just focus: he calls formal-direct abortion lawmakers Biden: “distinguished career in public service”, and Pelosi a: “fine public servant”, instead of cold blooded murderers…Corolary? The real battle is to be expected from us, lay Roman Catholics.Regards

  • Lydia McGrew says:

    “I guess it’d be OK if a candidate supported re-instituting slavery, or the killing of first-born infants, since those would have no chance of passing as well…”John McG, we’ve had our disagreements in the past, but here I can only say: Go! Right on!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading On the grave obligations of Catholics who voted for Obama despite his positions on the life issues at Zippy Catholic.

meta

%d bloggers like this: