Will the Clinton Catholics become Obama Catholics?
That’s actually not the right question.
The glaringly obvious question is why the media ignore the disconnect of a Catholic supporting a pro-abortion politician, no matter how much they like the candidate and their positions on anything else. The point is, unlike any other issue, abortion is about everything else.
Kathryn Jean Lopez has a good article on this over at NRO.
When the topic was recently a matter of cable talking-heads’ concern, I was asked, repeatedly, in all seriousness, if Catholics can even vote. After all, war is bad. The death penalty is bad. Abortion is bad. John McCain supports the war on terror. He supports capital punishment. He is against abortion. Obama: antiwar, pro-abortion, functionally anti-death penalty. So neither wins. Or Obama wins? “Can Catholics vote for anyone?†readers asked.
There is much confusion out there.
When I’m on the radio or at speaking engagements, I get the question often whether Catholics are ‘one-issue voters’. Apparently, Lopez answers this one a lot, too.
The thing about abortion is, it’s not just any other issue — as serious as so many others are. Abortion is not open to debate.
That’s not Lopez opining. It’s the unchanged teaching of the Catholic Church. She’s got a got snip there from Pope Benedict that clearly shows the moral connection of the protection of human life to….everything. She also quotes Archbishop Charles Chaput, which I’ve done here in the Forum on this, because he is so strong on his duty to be a voice in the public square, and he clearly articulates moral truths.
Pope Benedict called on the bishops to do that, in his address to them in Washington.
Lopez has a good piece on Catholics and politicians. The media should be more familiar with these points. So should Catholics.
Engage reason.
The article quotes Sen. Obama on a couple of things. One is what he said about the Born Alive Infants Act that he refused to support (a point I’ve made time and again).
The other is an impromptu answer he gave at a campaign rally.
Barack Obama says he would never want his daughters to be “punished†by the birth of an unplanned baby.
That got some play in the media for a few days, then dropped completely. No doubt we’ll be hearing more of that soundbite “punished with a baby” in the coming months.
Honestly, how can anyone with those views of life make a coherent argument for any other issue that involves rights and morality?
0 Comment
Exit polling in previous elections have pinpointed what is meant by the so-called “Catholic vote.” In general terms, the more often a Catholic attends church, the more likely he or she will support candidates that are supportive of life issues and traditional moral values. This is a problem because the moral formation (such as it is) of the majority of Catholics now comes from sources other than the hierarchy.
There is another factor that will come into play in a big way, and that is gender. My sense is that the majority of men will not vote for the skinny kid who doesn’t have the experience and toughness as does the gritty war hero/ex-P.O.W./tenured senator. Surely Obama’s inner polling would reflect this. There is little the Obama camp can do to change this perception, so they will be turning their sights onto other matters, such as appealing to the youth vote and to issues affecting women.
I’m concerned about Mc cain’s support for John Hegee and vice versa. How can he ( Mc Cain ) ask for Hagee’s support and endorsement without knowing Hagee is against the Catholic Church? Is Mc Cain so out of touch he doesn’t know what these protestant preachers stand for and preach? How can he now say he doesn’t want the endorsement? Is he doing it just because he got caught by the news media?