It amuses me to read about Catholics like Doug Kmiec on CBN News working night and day on fudging and fiddling with the language of the Democratic platform on abortion while the Bishops of Kansas speak so eloquently and simply on the same issue.
Let’s compare. Kmiec and fellow travelers have come out with their proposal for the new Democratic platform on abortion. They write the simple basic truth of the Dems stance on abortion in their first sentence:
The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.
Ok. Then comes the fudging where they do everything to show that they don’t really mean the first statement.
The Democratic Party also strongly supports access to affordable family planning services and comprehensive age-appropriate sex education which empower people to make informed choices and live healthy lives. We also recognize that such health care and education help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions. The Democratic Party also strongly supports a woman’s decision to have a child by ensuring access to and availability of programs for pre and post natal health care, parenting skills, income support, and caring adoption programs.
So they’re going to support abortion but work like gangbusters to make sure it never happens by giving away money. The funny thing is that they think they’re appealing to conservatives by supporting “sex education.” What? They said age appropriate -like Kindergartners putting condoms on bananas. Hey the tykes can learn sex ed and take care of one of the major food groups at snack time.
The Bishops of Kansas are a little more straightforward telling parishioners plainly that voting is a moral act. Their comments were published in the bulletin of Holy Trinity Catholic Church in Lenexa, Kansas.
PRUDENTIAL JUDGMENTS ON SOCIAL POLICY. In some moral matters the use of reason allows for a legitimate diversity in our prudential judgments. Catholic voters may differ, for example, on what constitutes the best immigration policy, how to provide universal health care, or affordable housing. Catholics may even have differing judgments on the state’s use of the death penalty or the decision to wage a just war. The morality of such questions lies not in what is done (the moral object), but in the motive and circumstances. Therefore, because these prudential judgments do not involve a direct choice of something evil and take into consideration various goods, it is possible for Catholic voters to arrive at different, even opposing judgments.
Notwithstanding a possible diversity of prudential judgments, each of us should guide our decision-making on such issues by a fundamental respect for the dignity of
every human person from the moment of conception to natural death. This is a non-negotiable principle. It is the foundation for both Catholic social teaching and of a just society. Respect for human dignity is the basis for the fundamental right to life.
Because of respect for the dignity of the human person, Catholics are obliged to come to the aid and defense of the defenseless, especially the poor. Another guiding principle is the defense and
promotion of marriage as the unbreakable bond between one man and one woman. Society is only as healthy as is the institution of marriage and family. Good and evil in the
above-mentioned issues can be determined by the use of right reason. While it is true that the Church’s teaching on these matters is clarified and strengthened by the light of the Gospel, throughout history persons of good will have understood these truths from reason alone, independent of the conviction of faith.
To me, it’s impossible to read these two statements and come away wondering who’s speaking the truth. Simple. Powerful. Eternal. Truth.