MSW v. the Catholic Left | National Catholic Reporter

MSW v. the Catholic Left | National Catholic Reporter  by MSW. MGB: Catholic politicians who are pro-choice should not be defended.  They should speak for themselves rather than hiding behind some pseudo-constitutional commitment to pluralism.  In truth, whatever you feel about abortion, repealing Roe v. Wade is not the route to diminish it.  Catholic politicians who are usually also lawyers should explain that to the bishops publicly and in great detail, regardless of any fear that Catholic voters may rebel against what would look like an act of disrespect - when instead it would be an act of political courage.  Don't expect non-Catholic pro-choicers to wade into this if the Catholic ones won't talk honestly with their own bishops.



On gay marriage, only fecundity, which is not a deal breaker in marriage, is missing for gays - and they can adopt or have often had kids previously.  My neice is a step child of my brother when he married his husband, for example.  Thinking their sex life is icky is not a moral argument.



As I stated yesterday, liberal Catholic morality does come from our view of Calvary as a vision quest rather than a blood offering to an angry God.  It is for us, not for God's benefit.  Of course, this does not justify abortion - but justifying abortion and permitting it because a criminal approach - even a fetal rights approach (which brings with it a crimial approach) is simply not a good idea.  There is nothing in the gospel that mandates a police state on any isue, from alcohol prohibition to abortion.  Indeed, the Torah mandates abortion when adultery is suspected - because adultery was as much a property crime as it was a sexual offense.



It seems that abortion has taken its place among those who would regard women as property - and rejecting that impression is the reason many are adamant about abortion as a right.  Still, you don't have to agree with them to think criminalization won't work - while throwing money at families with kids likely would.  Of course, it is at this point that the pro-lifers start talking about personal responsibility for paying for your own children - at which point the pro-choicers yell "Checkmate!"



Don't talk about solidarity unless you include solidarity with a woman who has decided she must have an abortion - and that it is not about the inconvenience of pregnancy.  Don't talk solidarity until you are willing to defy Rome about ordaining women - as the suitable vessels argument is purely sexism.  Until a woman priest - indeed a married lesbian woman priest - is the voice of the pro-life movement, it will continue to be regarded as sexist.



Of course, the fun debates occur when we talk about essential late term abortions.  This is where the hierarchy is not even open to a therapeutic abortion when the child is doomed - never to survive pregnancy - while the woman cannot live - or even would be better off if the pregnancy were ended now.  Prelates sometimes seem that God will strike them head if they ascent to the reasonableness of abortion in such circumstances - or maybe they are worried about retribution from fellow prelates.  Either way, their God is an Ogre - not because they believe God would damn the woman but because they believe God would damn them.  Their thoughts on God are not worthy of God - and certaily not of Jesus.



Of course, there are those who think even publicly disputing this is mortally sinful.  They are wrong.  I go to Communion and Jesus is perfectly happy with me doing so.