Abortion & Last Month’s Election
CHRIST & NEIGHBOR
The election is over and now we can discuss the question of abortion and partisan politics without endangering the NOR’s tax exemption.
Let us take a specific example of the abortion discussion before the election and try to conclude, without rancor or emotionalism, whether or not it measured up to the highest standards of truth in general and Catholic orthodoxy in particular.
In its issues of August 19 and 26, The Pilot, official newspaper of the Archdiocese of Boston, ran two editorials on the subject. The first was entitled “The Catholic Vote” and included the following: “There are many moral issues in this year’s campaign. Does the candidate offer a realistic plan for world peace? A means of helping those who live in poverty? Does he promise to protect the rights of all people?”
These are good questions. The editorial then makes a valid point — namely, that candidates may agree on the goals and the moral principles involved, but disagree on the “practical, prudential judgments” that are involved in achieving the goals.
You May Also Enjoy
A review of Unborn Human Life and Fundamental Rights: Leading Constitutional Cases Under Scrutiny, edited by Pilar Zambrano and William L. Saunders.
Morning-after pills are effective only after ovulation and fertilization have already occurred; they are, at least some if not much of the time, a form of early abortion.
Disability advocates like those at Not Dead Yet and Second Thoughts find their own lives well worth living and filled with dignity.