The “Catholic” Politician of 2001 & The Southern “Gentleman” of 1860
IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE?
No explanation is needed for what follows.
The “Catholic” Politician of 2001: “I am not in favor of abortion; indeed, personally I am opposed to it. But I do not feel it is my place to impose my convictions upon anyone else!”
The Southern “Gentleman” of 1860: “I am not in favor of slavery; indeed, personally I am opposed to it. But I do not feel it is my place to impose my convictions upon anyone else!”
+ +
The “Catholic” Politician of 2001: “I am not pro-abortion! I am pro-choice! I favor leaving the decision up to the woman and the woman alone. It is her decision — and no one else’s.”
The Southern “Gentleman” of 1860: “I am not pro-slavery! I am pro-choice! I favor leaving the decision up to the slaveholder and to him alone. It is his decision — and no one else’s.”
You May Also Enjoy
The Southern "Gentleman" of 1860: "I am not in favor of slavery; indeed, personally I am opposed to it. But I do not feel it is my place to impose my convictions upon anyone else!"
Precedent is a major component, but the law can become confused and contradictory when an underlying moral question is ignored.
Public discourse remains limited to material concerns, but what really differentiates human beings is culture, which is founded on religion.