The final refuge of scoundrels
As a Catholic myself, I listened intently when John Kerry pronounced his Catholic faith in prefacing his remarks concerning abortion during last week's debate. I would advise those of my mind-set not to eat prior to reading this upcoming excerpt, lest you wish to clean the regurgitation from your keyboard.
Here's Kerry in last Friday's debate:
First of all, I cannot tell you how deeply I respect the belief about life and when it begins. I'm a Catholic, raised a Catholic. I was an altar boy. Religion has been a huge part of my life. It helped lead me through a war, leads me today. But I can't take what is an article of faith for me and legislate it for someone who doesn't share that article of faith...
Oh really? First of all this is nonsense in the most basic sense. If Kerry were to be taken at his word here, it would be impossible for him to support legislation that condemns murder since I'm sure there exists some fringe anarchist article of faith worshipers who have a deep conviction that murder is perfectly permissible (think al Qaida).
Secondly and more importantly, since Kerry is prefacing his remarks by linking them to his deep Catholic faith, I submit this excerpt from Pope John Paul II's Evangelium vitae 73 regarding abortion:
"(it is) never licit to obey it, or to take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or to vote for it..."
Now, I don't begrudge Kerry his stance on abortion or any other person's stance for that matter. What I do begrudge him, however, is the temerity to pronounce himself a Catholic and a supporter of abortion in the same breath. It is both the height of hypocrisy and the depths of political manipulation. Kerry wants the Catholic vote, which is breaking heavily toward Bush, yet he wants to appease his base in the same sentence. It's despicable. By all means, Mr. Kerry, support abortion all you want, but please don't do it in the name of Catholicism.
Kerry goes on:
Now, I believe that you can take that position and not be pro- abortion, but you have to afford people their constitutional rights. And that means being smart about allowing people to be fully educated, to know what their options are in life, and making certain that you don't deny a poor person the right to be able to have whatever the constitution affords them if they can't afford it otherwise.
There you have it. I'm a Catholic! I'm a man of deep faith! I don't personally believe in abortion but if a poor person wishes to crush the skull of their child, well, who am I to say they can't? It's their Constitutional Right! I wonder if Mr. Kerry would cling so vehemently to the Constitutional right afforded in the Dred Scott decision. I would like to think not but with Mr. Kerry one gets the impression that if his constituency was predominantly slave owners he just might find the merits of that case as well. "I myself am I man of deep faith and oppose enslaving other men, but I can't deny a person the right to be able to have whatever the constitution affords them...". By the way, even if we were to believe Kerry was a true man of faith and was tortured by his deep belief in life and the constitutional right to an abortion, wouldn't such a man at least wish to limit such a practice, which was in conflict with his soul, to the minimum that the constitution allows? And if so, then surely Kerry would support the ban on partial birth abortion which allows for taking the life of a child right up to 9 months -- a full 6 MONTHS beyond what Roe v. Wade allows -- right? Oops, he supports partial birth abortion as well.
It's always funny to me that liberals, who are fond of treating the Constitution as an "evolving document", love to cling to one of the most legally flawed decisions in Supreme Court history in Roe v. Wade as the rock upon which no further evolution will proceed.
Mr. Kerry, it's perfectly permissible in the current political arena to oppose abortion. If you oppose it, then oppose it. If you support it, which it seems clear you do, don't hide behind a perilous constitutional decision and please don't hide behind religion, particularly mine.
John Kerry is set to give a speech this week on the importance of his "faith". With Kerry's last-minute posturing that he is the man to defend America from terrorists, the axiom which comes to mind is that "Patriotism is the final refuge of scoundrels". But after patriotism, religion runs a close second.
Here's Kerry in last Friday's debate:
First of all, I cannot tell you how deeply I respect the belief about life and when it begins. I'm a Catholic, raised a Catholic. I was an altar boy. Religion has been a huge part of my life. It helped lead me through a war, leads me today. But I can't take what is an article of faith for me and legislate it for someone who doesn't share that article of faith...
Oh really? First of all this is nonsense in the most basic sense. If Kerry were to be taken at his word here, it would be impossible for him to support legislation that condemns murder since I'm sure there exists some fringe anarchist article of faith worshipers who have a deep conviction that murder is perfectly permissible (think al Qaida).
Secondly and more importantly, since Kerry is prefacing his remarks by linking them to his deep Catholic faith, I submit this excerpt from Pope John Paul II's Evangelium vitae 73 regarding abortion:
"(it is) never licit to obey it, or to take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or to vote for it..."
Now, I don't begrudge Kerry his stance on abortion or any other person's stance for that matter. What I do begrudge him, however, is the temerity to pronounce himself a Catholic and a supporter of abortion in the same breath. It is both the height of hypocrisy and the depths of political manipulation. Kerry wants the Catholic vote, which is breaking heavily toward Bush, yet he wants to appease his base in the same sentence. It's despicable. By all means, Mr. Kerry, support abortion all you want, but please don't do it in the name of Catholicism.
Kerry goes on:
Now, I believe that you can take that position and not be pro- abortion, but you have to afford people their constitutional rights. And that means being smart about allowing people to be fully educated, to know what their options are in life, and making certain that you don't deny a poor person the right to be able to have whatever the constitution affords them if they can't afford it otherwise.
There you have it. I'm a Catholic! I'm a man of deep faith! I don't personally believe in abortion but if a poor person wishes to crush the skull of their child, well, who am I to say they can't? It's their Constitutional Right! I wonder if Mr. Kerry would cling so vehemently to the Constitutional right afforded in the Dred Scott decision. I would like to think not but with Mr. Kerry one gets the impression that if his constituency was predominantly slave owners he just might find the merits of that case as well. "I myself am I man of deep faith and oppose enslaving other men, but I can't deny a person the right to be able to have whatever the constitution affords them...". By the way, even if we were to believe Kerry was a true man of faith and was tortured by his deep belief in life and the constitutional right to an abortion, wouldn't such a man at least wish to limit such a practice, which was in conflict with his soul, to the minimum that the constitution allows? And if so, then surely Kerry would support the ban on partial birth abortion which allows for taking the life of a child right up to 9 months -- a full 6 MONTHS beyond what Roe v. Wade allows -- right? Oops, he supports partial birth abortion as well.
It's always funny to me that liberals, who are fond of treating the Constitution as an "evolving document", love to cling to one of the most legally flawed decisions in Supreme Court history in Roe v. Wade as the rock upon which no further evolution will proceed.
Mr. Kerry, it's perfectly permissible in the current political arena to oppose abortion. If you oppose it, then oppose it. If you support it, which it seems clear you do, don't hide behind a perilous constitutional decision and please don't hide behind religion, particularly mine.
John Kerry is set to give a speech this week on the importance of his "faith". With Kerry's last-minute posturing that he is the man to defend America from terrorists, the axiom which comes to mind is that "Patriotism is the final refuge of scoundrels". But after patriotism, religion runs a close second.
posted by Wonderdog | 11:35 AM | Permalink
|
2 comments
2 Comments:
Great post. You'll like the Crispin Sartwell editorial I linked to in the "moral relativism" post -- regarding Kerry's illogical position on abortion.
I must confess I'm baffled by the number of people I know who say "I believe abortion is murder, but I don't think I can impose that belief on society as a whole." It's the only issue I can think of where otherwise serious people propose that individuals -- rather than society as a whole -- should decide, based on "personal conscience," matters of life and death and how murder gets defined.
How about if he says, I personally oppose abortion and, knowing that many other Americans also oppose it, I would work to keep all federal money out of it and to not require religious based groups to have to include it in their health insurance, etc. That is, it's legal, but we're not going to force everyone to fund NARAL's personal belief that it is OK.
Why is it always the conservatives who are supposed to be tolerant of offensive matters... and also pay for them!
- Conservative in Virginia
Post a Comment
<< Home