HeadlineBistro

Life Comes First

Yesterday offered a rather large, eclectic spate of Church news, from the senselessly violent to the encouraging, with a little of the bizarre in between. Let’s take a short break from election updates to highlight those.

• The top Jesuit priest in Russia, Fr. Otto Messmer, was found brutally murdered in his Moscow flat earlier this week, along with his brother priest Fr. Victor Betancourt of Ecuador. As of yesterday afternoon, there was still no word as to the cause of the attack or identity of the perpetrator.

• And in another sad story of violence against Catholics, an Indian priest died of a brain injury more than two months after being beaten by a Hindu extremist mob. Fr. Bernard Digal was beaten with crowbars and axes when the mob set fire to the church he was sleeping in – he had already been fleeing the violence from village to village. Fr. Digal was hospitalized for his injuries and released, but further tests right before he died revealed he had a blood clot in his brain.

• For Headline Bistro’s Canadian readers: in receiving the new Canadian ambassador to the Holy See, Pope Benedict XVI reminded the country of its Catholic heritage, saying that the Church’s institutions and “the culture that it promotes represents the cornerstone of the building of Canadian society.” That said, the pope encouraged Canadians to uphold the culture of life and to exercise “true freedom” – a liberty based on God and obedient to the natural moral law. Pope Benedict also affirmed the Canadian bishops’ initiatives “in favor of family life and thus the dignity of the human being.”

• Finally, here’s a good story that’s just too weird to pass up: a German archbishop named – get this – Reinhard Marx just released his own book on economic social justice. It’s entitled … you guessed it … Das Kapital: a Plea for Man, and it takes as its premise an argument against the excesses of capitalism. Archbishop Marx (who has no familial relation to the actual socialist, Karl) makes clear that his book takes issue with actual Marxism economics, writing in the foreword to his namesake that the consequences of “your thinking were disastrous.” Archbishop Marx’s book highlights the dangers of unrestrained capitalism, which, he says, “without humanity, solidarity and justice has no morals and no future.” Overall, he advocates a world market economy that is in keeping with the Catholic Church’s social teaching and in particular cares for the poor.

Meanwhile, Christianity Today has an interesting interview up about evangelicals’ role in the “new” Republican Party. Particularly if McCain loses, The Atlantic editor Ross Douthat said, Republicans will be forced to “rebrand” – a process that might or might not alienate evangelicals, who have consistently made up a solid voting bloc for the GOP.

Douthat’s interview is enlightening, as the issues he highlights in terms of evangelicals’ voting trends seem to parallel the debates we’ve seen in Catholic circles this election season, too. For example – do we stick to the party with the hardest stance against abortion or “broaden the tent” of issues that affect our vote, such as poverty, the environment and AIDS? (Such a dichotomy seems reflective of the “Young Moderates” piece on Politico earlier this week, and Douthat makes a good case that that dichotomy may not be entirely accurate, after all.)

His description of the “uneasy marriage” between evangelicalism and “American-style conservatism” is also thought-provoking – evangelicals have an innate desire for social justice, Douthat said, which at times can seem at odds with “some of the more straightforward, pro-free market, pro-business aspects of the contemporary Republican Party.” Catholics who have been pondering the relationship of the Church’s social teaching to recent events on Wall Street and Capitol Hill can probably relate; any partisan ties take second place to an honest consideration of which policies better uphold human dignity, even in the marketplace.

Douthat said rising Republican leaders will need to clarify what it is to be truly “pro-family.” On the other side of the party wall, this election season has seen Democrats running under a pro-life banner. Are these examples reflective of even the slightest movement in American politics toward a better understanding of what it really means to govern justly? We can only wait and see what will happen on Tuesday, and in the months and years to come after this election. 

As for the scenario of Christians choosing between a vote against abortion and a “broader” look at other issues, we know that “Faithful Citizenship” acknowledges the existence of those issues besides abortion. The bishops stress, however, the priority of defending life and mention certain distortions of the Church’s teaching on this matter – namely, “a moral equivalence that makes no ethical distinctions between different kinds of issues involving human life and dignity.”

“The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many,” the document clearly states. “It must always be opposed” (28).

For many Catholics, this election season has been clear: they will use their vote to defend life, particularly that of the unborn, and a key way they will make this fight is by seeking to overturn pro-abortion laws like Roe v. Wade.

Others seem to view the election through the lenses of “moral equivalence,” as the bishops said, weighing promises to reduce the number of abortions through programs for unwed mothers and the like, as well as other, worthy social justice issues like poverty and war. (The U.S. bishops crafted their own answer to the dilemma by saying Catholics must work to defeat abortion and promote programs that benefit struggling mothers and their babies). 

Life comes first – and the Church cannot be more clear that the right to life, the defense of life, does not fall as “one issue among many” on the ballot. 

Pope John Paul II understood the desire to bring social justice to the nation and the world, whether it be through combating poverty or ending unjust wars.

However, he underlined what must come first:

Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights – for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture – is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination. (Christifideles Laici, 38)

Too Close to Call?

To state the obvious … this race is close. Real Clear Politics has Obama up at an average six-point lead nationwide, but four of the polls that average takes into consideration have Obama up by only three percentage points. In fact, only one survey included in RCP’s average gives Obama a double digit lead – Pew Research’s 15-point lead for Obama (and 7-point disparity from the closest results of other polls).

Florida, Montana, North Dakota, Missouri, Indiana and North Carolina are all toss up states, with McCain leading by about 3.5 percentage points in Montana and Obama holding less than one percentage point in Missouri. (The “Show-Me” state boasts 11 electoral votes). Obama just lost his miniscule lead in Indiana, with Reuters/Zogby placing McCain six percentage points ahead. Finally, Florida and its 27 electoral votes – determined too close to call yesterday – are surely giving both campaigns reason to lose sleep in the few nights remaining before the election.

It’s arguable whether Pennsylvania will truly come out as an Obama stronghold – “This is not a given,” said Democratic Governor Ed Rendell, who a couple weeks ago admitted he was “still a little nervous” about the state and asked Obama to come back to campaign.   

And Ohio is even less of a sure slide into Obama’s take of electoral votes: A Quinnipiac University poll gives Obama a nine-point lead, but this is five points less than what the poll found last week. The Real Clear Politics average of Ohio state polls places Obama at only 5.6 percentage points ahead. Even Joe the Plumber is campaigning for McCain now in his home state.

We could go on, but you get the point: in no way is this election a landslide just quite yet. (This is apparently news to at least one overeager publication, however).

Other note-worthy news items include:

• A prominent Muslim convert to Catholicism – the journalist Pope Benedict XVI himself baptized in Rome last Easter – wrote an open letter to the pope, saying that Islamic extremism is not a fringe ideology but “the mature fruit" of following "the sayings of the Quran and the thought and action of Mohammed.” Magdi Allam received international attention with his conversion and is an outspoken critic of the Islamic faith. In his letter, Allam particularly criticized the Vatican’s approach to dialogue with Muslims, which focuses on Islam and Christianity’s shared monotheism, value of “the moral life and worship of God,” recognition of Jesus as a prophet and reverence for Mary.  His statements come at a sensitive time for the Vatican, a week out from its first ever Catholic-Muslim Forum.

• McCain is taking advantage of seemingly contradictory information about Obama’s proposed tax plan. The confusion centers around Obama’s tax-cut threshold – what maximum income would still qualify Americans for a tax cut. As of yesterday, the Obama website said $250,000, but a recent ad has Obama saying, “If you have a job, pay taxes and make less than $200,000 a year, you’ll get a tax cut.” And finally, Biden made the McCain campaign’s day by telling a TV station in Scranton that tax breaks should go to “people making under $150,000 a year.” McCain’s warning that that “definition of rich has a way of creeping down,” while Biden’s spokesman called McCain desperate and asserted “no family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase.”

• Saddleback pastor Rick Warren officially endorsed California’s Proposition 8 this week, saying in an email to his congregation that “this is not a political issue; it is a moral issue that God has spoken clearly about. There is no doubt where we should stand on this issue.” Warren’s megachurch was host to this summer’s memorable “civil forum” with both presidential candidates, and the pastor has been lauded by many as the best, most effective moderator in any joint appearance of the candidates this campaign season.

News Wrap and a Quote of the Day

Yesterday’s top story came with the revelation that two young men – self-ascribed white supremacists – were allegedly plotting to kill Sen. Obama and slaughter scores of black youth.

The pair was taken into custody last week, but documents surrounding the plot were only unsealed on Monday.

According to officials, Daniel Cowart, 20, of Bells, Tenn., and Paul Schlesselman, 18, of West Helena, Ark., did not seem to have the means to actually carry out the assassination. However, said the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, they were in possession of an unregistered firearm and had detailed their plans of robbing a firearms store, killing and decapitating 88 people at a predominately black school and ultimately rushing at Obama in a speeding car while firing off their weapons. 

In other news, Alaska Senator Ted Stevens was convicted Tuesday on all seven counts of lying about gifts received from an oil executive, including about $250,000 in home renovations.

Stevens, a Republican, seemed undeterred by the verdict and announced no plans to withdraw from his bid for reelection – on the contrary, he called the convictions “unjust,” saying he would fight them “with every ounce of energy” while continuing his race.

“I ask that Alaskans and my Senate colleagues stand with me as I pursue my rights,” Stevens said. 

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin pointed out the corrupting influence of “the big oil service companies” over the state, saying she was monitoring the situation and that she was “confident Sen. Stevens will do what’s right for the people of Alaska.”

Sen. McCain went further, calling on his colleague to resign.

With the campaign less than a week away, Indiana’s Secretary of State, Todd Rokita, has called for felony charges against the state’s ACORN office and a probe into the organization’s voting drives.

Rokita said the community organization group knowingly submitted suspect voting registration forms, including multiple registrations under the same name.

ACORN’s Midwest director lambasted what he called the Republican Secretary of State’s “aggressive” attempts to “get press attention through his demonization of ACORN.”

In financial news, the U.S. Treasury Department announced that it will begin its enormous cash injection into the country’s banking industry this week, putting $125 billion into nine major banks in return for ownership stakes.

For an encouraging story of the day: students at St. Louis University have begun a scholarship fund for pregnant women seeking higher education.

Citing little, if any, resources for young, single mothers at their university, students from SLU’s Students for Life group concluded that these women had to choose “between staying at SLU and achieving their goals and having a baby.” 

That said, they went to task raising the minimum $25,000 needed to establish an endowed scholarship for student mothers. They’re currently about a quarter of the way to their goal; more information on the scholarship can be found here.

While SLU’s Students for Life members are actively building a culture of life on their campus, a Politico article analyzes the “young moderate” voting bloc, describing what this constituent group is supposedly seeking in political candidates and predicting which way they’ll lean in coming years.

“These more socially tolerant, opportunity-oriented voters are the ones likely to put Barack Obama in the White House next week,” wrote Politico reporter Mark Penn.  “But the broader potential is for the election to choke off the Republican Party and its religious right ideology for a generation.”

He continued, “These new moderate voters are better-educated, more in tune with the information age and far removed from the traditional labor base of the Democratic Party. They are more open to trade and sensitive to tax increases. They also oppose the Iraq war, but they want to see strength in national security. They overwhelmingly will favor new energy policies for ethanol and other biofuels, solar power and wind power.”

The two stories are an interesting compare-and-contrast between the beliefs – and actions – of the young and faithful and the assertion that the better-educated, “more in tune” voters will be the ones to “choke off … religious right ideology.”

Where does the former group fit in the bigger picture of the rising generation of American voters? It would be an interesting study to make.

Wrapping up, here’s a quote of the day from the Auxiliary Bishop of San Diego, Bishop Salvatore Cordileone, who wrote the city council in protest of its stance against California’s Proposition 8:

“Those of us who favor preserving marriage as the union of a man and a woman in California are wondering what ever happened to our democracy,” Cordileone opened in his letter.

He concluded:

After having made such laudatory and inspired commitments to our youth, please, do not now sell them down the river by telling them that it’s not important for them to have a mother and a father.

Please do not divide our community any more bitterly than it already is. ... Please, do not give up on the idea that democracy is a good thing when allowed to work according to its principles. Please, let the people decide, fair and square.

Redistributive Change We Need?

A 2001 radio interview featuring then-state senator Obama surfaced over the weekend, going viral on YouTube and both the liberal and conservative blogosphere, though hardly touched by traditional media sources.

In the interview with a Chicago station, Obama discussed his views of how the civil rights movement did not go far enough in terms of ensuring better redistribution of wealth, as well as how to enact “redistributive change” today, particularly through the legislature.

“The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society, and to that extent, as radical as people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical,” Obama said, referring to Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren, who presided over the court during the turbulent ‘50s and ‘60s.

Despite inroads made at the time in terms of the civil rights movement – Warren crafted the Brown v. Board of Education desegregation ruling – the court “didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution,” Obama said.

“I think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that the civil rights movement became so court-focused,” Obama said. “I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still suffer from that.”

The redistributive theme has already made its way into McCain rallies warning of socialistic policies the GOP says will come with an Obama administration.

Obama “believes in redistributing wealth, not in policies that grow our economy and create jobs,” McCain said in Ohio. He added, "We've learned more about Senator Obama's real goals for the country over the last two weeks than we learned over the last two years.”

Obama spokesman Bill Burton responded to the McCain campaign’s use of the audio, calling the attention a “fake news controversy drummed up by the all too common alliance of Fox News, the Drudge Report and John McCain.”

Burton also said that in the interview, Obama had not advocated for the courts to redistribute wealth, and another Obama advisor argued that in the context of the interview, the term “redistribution” applied to education, legal representation and other issues facing minorities.

In other news:

• Columnist Michael Malone’s opinion piece on the mainstream media’s aversion to tough coverage of the Democratic presidential ticket is must reading for anyone seeking a journalist’s take on the hows and whys of media bias.

• The New York Times has an interesting piece on pro-life Democrats whose stance against abortion is making for tight, if not unusual congressional races. The trend of pro-life Democrats is being heavily championed by groups like Democrats for Life, while the National Institute of Reproductive Health is quoted as being disappointed with the party’s willingness to back such candidates. “The movement to recruit anti-choice candidates ignores the larger reality that this is a pro-choice nation,” said the president of the institute. “It misses the larger point.” (Rather, she seems to have missed this poll – which finds 71 percent of the American electorate in favor of significant restrictions on abortion, including 76 percent of self-described “pro-choice” voters.)

• Latest polling on the presidential race finds Obama still with a single-digit lead over McCain. The Reuters/C-Span/Zogby poll puts Obama at a four-point lead, which, though a slight dip from his five-point lead on Monday, still does not show McCain “where he needs to be with some key groups.” According to the poll, Obama is holding on to Hispanic and Catholic voters.

Weekend highlights

It was a relatively quiet weekend, news-wise, with the presidential candidates still pushing in the battleground states and the synod of bishops wrapping up in Rome.

Highlights of the weekend include:

• The Pope announced a visit to Africa next March, setting the stage for a synod of African bishops in the fall of 2009. Pope Benedict XVI will visit Cameroon and Angola, celebrating the 500th anniversary of the Gospel reaching the latter country.

• The Washington Post wrote of the “Fresh Hope and Concerns” over new fetal DNA testing methods, which on one hand will be able to pinpoint a greater number of genetic abnormalities but on the other hand cause many to fear an increase in abortions as parents seek “the perfect child.”

• In campaign news, the national French archives released video footage of McCain’s POW days in Vietnam. McCain is portrayed lying in a bed, injured, and smoking a cigarette while speaking of his family and his ordeal.

• Many business owners are wary of the impact of Obama’s health care plan on employers, foreseeing high penalties for businesses who do not comply with the details his plan. Many of those details are yet to be spelled out – McCain pushed Obama to say how much of a fine businesses could incur – but the Democratic candidate has stressed that “all but the smallest businesses who don’t make a meaningful contribution today to the health coverage of their employees … do so by supporting this new plan.”

• It’s no surprise that Obama is the international community’s favored candidate, but the United Nations, apparently, is a particular stronghold for him. While American and international staffers and diplomats alike vocally hope for an Obama win and the end of the end of “a bad eight years,” former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton said he was not surprised. “The fact is that most conservatives, most Republicans don't worship at the altar in New York, and I think that aggravates them more than anything else,” Bolton said. "What they want is the bending of the knee, and they'll get it from an Obama administration."

• A pro-life Democrat came to the defense of Denver archbishop Charles Chaput, who has been accused by Democrats in particular throughout the election season of partisan statements in favor of the Republican Party. “It is true that Chaput has criticized pro-choice Democrats, such as Barack Obama,” wrote Mark Stricherz from America Magazine. “But that's because they favor abortion rights, not because they are Democrats.” Stricherz also pointed out that the archbishop has criticized pro-abortion Republicans like Rudy Giuliani and that, furthermore, Chaput’s persistent statements about the fundamental right to life flows from the Catechism itself, not any partisan platform.

Presidential Polls and Prop 8

An email came into Headline Bistro’s inbox yesterday morning, wondering what was up with a seeming discrepancy in our coverage of the latest national polls.

For some reason, Thursday’s email didn’t get sent until the evening, which meant many people who check the news from work didn’t see that day’s headlines until yesterday morning. That’s generally not a problem – except on Thursday, Obama was leading among Catholics with a widening lead among the electorate as a whole, while this morning, the most accurate pollster of the 2004 elections announced McCain ahead by nine points among Catholics, and only one point behind Obama overall.

The reader who clicked on the late email featuring the first Zogby poll, only to be brought to a top story on Headline Bistro that, in terms of Catholic votes, proclaimed the exact opposite information, was not the only one among us surprised.

Anyone following various poll numbers lately might well scratch his head over the following disparity:

RealClearPolitics.com’s polling average places Obama at a 7.5 percentage point lead. However, on one hand, this is taking into account the Investor’s Business Daily/TIPP poll, which only gives Obama a 45-44 lead, and on the other hand, there is the CBS News/NY Times poll that launches Obama into double digit territory.

A Pew Research poll gives Obama a 14 point lead; the Associated Press/GfK poll puts McCain and Obama at an essential tie.

What is going on?

A GOP pollster criticized major media outlets for conducting sloppy, or at least unrealistic number gathering and ultimately, by influencing their viewership, creating self-fulfilling prophecies in terms of the candidate their polls declare is ahead.

Kellyanne Conway, president of the Polling Company, pointed to pollsters who disproportionately survey people who are more likely to vote Democrat (Catholic blogger Matthew Archbold picked up on this in his blog). Conway also talked about as the “insidious” effect such numbers have had on more recent, poll-conscious campaigns.

Overall, said Michael Barone, a former pollster himself and a Wall Street Journal columnist, reading polls is “less a science than an art,” and we can trust them – “with qualifications.”

In other news, check out Headline Bistro’s exclusive story on California’s hard-fought battle over Proposition 8 – an issue with varying polls of its own, including one in particular that shows Californians are concerned with the possible legal implications of anti-discrimination laws and same-sex marriage in the state.

The article quoted John C. Eastman, Dean of Chapman University School of Law in Orange, Calif., who foresees impending lawsuits against religious institutions and the usurpation of parents’ and clergy’s rights by courts’ interpretations of anti-discrimination rules if Proposition 8 fails.

Proposition 8 advocates are not running off with “a crazy argument” when they warn of the implications legalized same-sex marriage could have on religious institutions, private citizens and schools, Eastman said.

And almost as if to back up his point, another California school made news this week when children as young as kindergartners brought home information about the school’s celebration of “National Coming Out Day.”

As it turns out, the day was marked by a teacher’s discussion to the middle school – middle school – Gay-Straight Alliance, but one mother of a kindergarten student still had qualms.

“She does not need to learn about historical figures in the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community," Voelker said of her daughter. "She needs to work on her writing, she needs to work on her reading, she does not need to know this."

Greenspan on the Financial Crisis

Alan Greenspan admitted yesterday to a House hearing that he “found a flaw” in his government-hands-off approach to the market. The entirety of his prepared remarks can be found here.   

Describing the financial crisis we’re now in as a “once-in-a-century credit tsunami,” the former Federal Reserve Chairman added, “We cannot expect perfection in any area where forecasting is required.”

What went wrong?

Lack of internal restraint and surveillance of individual financial companies, Greenspan told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Aggressive and unrealistic securitization of home mortgages coupled with plummeting lending standards.

He likewise said he was mistaken in "presuming the self interest of banks ... and others, that they were capable of protecting their own shareholders and the equity in their firms."

However, when pressed further by Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman, Greenspan admitted his shock at the breakdown and said, “I still do not understand exactly how it happened.”

Eric Pavlat at Inside Catholic had a theological take on Greenspan’s surprise and suggested that “the Republican Party needs to accept what Alan Greenspan has learned.”

“Original sin gives people the tendency to act selfishly,” Pavlat wrote. “Just as we need laws and customs to keep us in check, so too do companies, industries, and financial institutions.  Otherwise, original sin will keep getting the better of us, from Enron scandals to oil price speculation, from lead-tainted toys to sub-prime mortgages.”

Granted, the extent to which Greenspan stood for a laissez-faire economy could be argued, as could the measures the government needs to take in terms of stricter regulation for a shaky and vulnerable market, but Pavlat’s argument is interesting in light of the Catechism’s commendation of “reasonable regulation of the marketplace … in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good” (paragraph 2425).

For balance, though, let’s take a look at what else the Church has to say about economic morals:

For starters, “Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for ‘there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market’” (2425).

Likewise, while the state must take on the task of guaranteeing individual freedom and a stable currency so that workers can enjoy the fruit of their labor, businesses themselves are responsible for their economic effects on society.

“They have an obligation to consider the good of persons and not only the increase of profits,” the Catechism teaches – a seemingly common-sense, “Do unto others” mandate that really ought to be in the best self-interest of all businesses, including Wall Street’s financial institutions.

Still, as Greenspan admitted, if the market’s “central pillar” of mutual surveillance and accountability – including a demand that shareholders be protected – fails, “market stability is undermined,” and people like himself are left stunned at the its remains. 

Any thoughts or reactions to Greenspan’s comments?

The Bishops Speak in the Catholics-for-Obama Debate

Perhaps the biggest story yesterday in terms of abortion and the elections came with the U.S. Bishops’ statement on Catholics’ responsibility toward pregnant women and their unborn babies.

Though unlikely to cause a huge stir in the media – whose penchant for descriptions of the divided “Catholic vote” particularly tends to focus on high-profile, pro-life Catholics endorsing Obama – the bishops’ statement is significant in the debate over whether Catholics should give up the fight to overturn Roe v. Wade and promote programs that would prevent abortions instead.

Nicholas Cafardi, former dean of Duquesne University School of Law, said as much when he wrote, “I believe that we have lost the abortion battle – permanently.” He went on to argue that Obama’s policies come closer to Catholic social teaching on other intrinsic evils and serious moral issues such as torture and ignoring the poor, as well as highlight the Democratic platform’s language on supporting pregnant women and promoting adoptions as an alternative to abortion.

A recent Newsweek piece by Cafardi and two other pro-Obama Catholics, M. Cathleen Kavery and Douglas Kmiec, echoed this argument.

However, Cardinal Justin Rigali, Chairman of the Committee on Pro-Life Activities, and Bishop William Murhpy, Chairman of the Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, disagree with an either/or approach to abortion.

To focus exclusively on either overturning pro-abortion laws or providing support for pregnant women is inconsistent with Catholic teaching, they wrote.

Rather, they said, both are absolutely needed: “Our faith requires us to oppose abortion on demand and to provide help to mothers facing challenging pregnancies.”

Rigali and Murphy continued with an argument that, while the Catholic community has been “second to no one” in providing and advocating support for pregnant women and their families, the Church has likewise been adamant in its opposition of Roe v. Wade as an “intrinsically unjust law.”

“(Some) say we should accept Roe as a permanent fixture of constitutional law, stop trying to restore recognition for the unborn child’s human rights, and confine our public advocacy to efforts to ‘reduce abortion,’” the bishops wrote.

They go on to list reasons why this is an inadequate solution to the problem of abortion and not an option for the Church.

“Roe denied an entire class of innocent human beings the most fundamental human right, the right to life. In fact, the act of killing these fellow human beings was transformed from a crime into a ‘right,’ turning the structure of human rights on its head,” they wrote. “Reversing it is not a mere political tactic, but a moral imperative for Catholics and others who respect human life.”

The bishops specifically pointed out the danger of the Freedom of Choice Act, which could reverse 35 years’ worth of efforts to protect the unborn, as well as doctors’ rights of conscience. Obama has promised to sign the act into law if elected. 

In their conclusion, Rigali and Murphy returned to their first theme of employing both “essential” approaches to opposing abortion.

“By protecting the child’s life to the maximum degree possible, improving life-affirming support for pregnant women, and changing the attitudes and prejudices imposed on many women to make them see abortion as an acceptable or necessary solution, we will truly help build a culture of life,” they wrote.

Over at Newsweek, Catholic author George Weigel gave an editorialist’s perspective on the argument that Obama is the more reasonable, pro-life choice for president.

“How is it possible to square a concern for women in crisis with support of the presidential candidate who favors ending the modest federal funding some of those crisis pregnancy centers now receive?” Weigel asked.

Later in his essay, Weigel concludes, "Professors Cafardi, Kaveny, and Kmiec say they have 'no objections' to pursuing legal redress to Roe; yet they support a candidate who, given the opportunity, would certainly do everything in his power to make any revision of Roe, or return of the issue to the states, impossible for the foreseeable future. Once again, we're through the looking glass and into a wilderness of impossibilities."

Quick News Bites

Two more top ballot issues that Headline Bistro was remiss for leaving off last week’s list:

In Arkansas, voters will see Proposed Act 1 on their ballots, which would limit the fostering or adoption of children to married couples. While the initiative’s language applies to heterosexual and homosexual couples, Arkansas’ constitution was amended in 2004 to define marriage as between only a man and a woman.

Essentially, then, a passed Proposed Act 1 in Arkansas would prevent children from being placed in the foster or adoptive care of homosexual couples.

And finally, Connecticut may not have a ballot initiative this fall specifically relating to its Supreme Court’s recent decision that legalized same-sex marriage, but the state’s bishops have urged Catholics to vote “Yes” on a Constitutional Convention.

The proposal to hold a convention is Question 1 on the state ballot. If the initiative passes, the state legislature will appoint delegates to the convention, where an amendment for the definition of marriage – among other proposed amendments – can be considered and eventually presented to voters.

In other news…

• The most recent poll on California’s Proposition 8 shows the amendment has support among the majority of California voters, 52% - 43%. Notably, more than half of those opposed to the proposition said they would be likely to change their mind when reminded that the amendment did not affect same-sex couple’s ability to form civil unions.
• A Chicago Sun-Times blog pointed out how Obama’s campaign is selling the best election night coverage spots in Chicago for hefty prices – all but ensuring that it will be “the national elite outlets with deep pockets” covering what many are already predicting as a landslide victory.
• It’s not too late to get involved with 40 Days for Life – The National Catholic Register ran an inspiring story on individual firefighters in Massachusetts who have been organizing vigils outside of local abortion clinics.
• And for a slice of local flavor, one pharmacy in Chantilly, Va. Opened yesterday to the sprinkling of holy water from the bishop of Arlington. Divine Mercy Care pharmacy is one of the few in the country that does not stock birth control, cigarettes, pornography or condoms, citing the discrepancy those items have with Catholic teaching.

More Flawed Moral Reasoning for Abortion

Here’s a quote of the day for you:

The Delaware News Journal released an interview Sunday that it conducted with Sen. Joseph Biden last year during his own run in the primaries. The topic was abortion, and how the senator balances his Catholic faith with his legislative support of Roe v. Wade.

“To sum it up, as a Catholic, I’m a Pope John XXIII guy, I’m not a Pope John Paul guy,” Biden offered, seeming to insinuate that the pontiff who ushered in Vatican II was more permissive and understanding of “the very, very, very difficult moral, social and societal choice” of abortion that Catholic politicians must wrangle with.

The rest of Biden’s answers to the New Journal’s questions on his abortion stance sounded much like his Meet the Press appearance earlier in the campaign: the Church has always struggled with the moral implications of abortion, he said, and Roe v. Wade is a “civil remedy … for a theological dilemma.” As he later told Tom Brokaw, Biden asserted that he could not impose his Catholic beliefs on a pluralistic society.

Biden likewise offered an argument for an approach of “gradation” in terms of justifying the morality of an abortion.

“Roe v. Wade says there are differences depending on the idea of viability, differences in when it's appropriate and inappropriate for how broad the woman's options are,” Biden said, launching into examples of how abortions during the first trimester of a woman’s pregnancy are “absolute,” but by the last trimester, “the state has an interest in the fetus.”

“Now, it’s pretty hard to acknowledge there's no viability and so now the state has a much greater interest and you have much less control over the absolute ability when you make the decision about termination,” Biden explained. “That's the gradation.”

To say the least, Biden is standing on very shaky, flawed moral reasoning, particularly in his portrayal of the intrinsic evil of abortion – by its very nature, always morally wrong – as an issue which can be justified depending on its context and various circumstances.

And his surmising reference to Pope John XXIII is downright bizarre, as Biden offered no context or explanation as to why he feels he identifies with the pope who declared, “Human life is sacred” in his encyclical Mater et Magister.

“All men must recognize that fact,” Pope John XXIII wrote on his document on the Church as a Mother and Teacher. “From its very inception it reveals the creating hand of God. Those who violate His laws not only offend the divine majesty and degrade themselves and humanity, they also sap the vitality of the political community of which they are members” (paragraph 194).

Those are words that ought to cut to the heart of Catholic politicians who ultimately – after a host of tangled moral arguments – offer no qualms over their pro-abortion stances while continuing to drive their own political careers.