Dear George,
This is the third of my posts since you last sent your very thoughtful post.
I just mention this so you will know to look to the past two posts, also.
I feel fortunate that you are willing to have these discussions. Thank you.
We have had many discussions, but I don’t think you have responded to the following cautions the bishops have made in their document on voting––the document which we use for the resource for this discussion..
1. Catholics are not single-issue voters.
2. The second temptation in voting is to choose a pro-life candidate to protect innocent human life, and in doing so to dismiss other serious threats to human life and dignity.
3. The right to life implies and is linked to other human rights––to basic goods that every human person needs to live and thrive.
4. It is not enough to oppose evil, we must do good.
I look forward to your response.
Susan
Friday, August 21, 2009
Monday, August 17, 2009
The Comparison of Voting for a Hitler to Voting for a Candidate that is Pro-Choice
Dear George,
With warm regards, I hope all is going well with you. I’m trying to tackle one feature of our discussion at a time. It takes a lot of thought to do just one part of our complicated discussion..
Your statement: “What if the US had already legalized the killing of Jews, and it was occurring at an enormous rate—4,000 deaths a day. In the upcoming election, two candidates are running for office. One candidate supports the killing of Jews and promises to enact a bill guaranteeing the slaughter for ages to come. That same candidate also happens to have great ideas about social reform. The other candidate’s ideas on social reform seem lacking. However, he is pro-Jew. He would certainly not expand the killing of Jews and would block any further expansion of such activities. Would you vote for the first candidate? “
Regarding your statement above, I know George, that is I can understand that because you believe, single mindedly, that abortion is the very worst that can occur of anything, this comparison seems true to you. For me this is actually a ridiculous concoction of a comparison. If a candidate promised to kill Jews and guarantee the slaughter for years to come, truly, no one would be able to vote for a candidate using such language because we would all believe it is murder. On the other hand, regarding our discussion of abortion (intrinsic evil) not all people think abortion is murder. Think about the following. Is there a God? Is there an afterlife? Did Jesus Christ found the Catholic Church? We cannot know that for sure. But we have faith that those questions are answered in the positive as absolutely true. However, not all have been given the gift of faith. And their difference with us is an honest one. So I will not judge a person who differs from me as being somehow less perceptive than me because he arrives at a different point of view. Thus I do not agree with your statement that, “Any man who does not see the value of human life at so vulnerable a stage cannot be trusted with the reins of the country.”
In addition, notably, I see the possibility of reducing abortions by a man that speaks as Obama does in the following statements, below this paragraph. I have more hope that abortions can be reduced by the measures he speaks of compared to a leader who only has vague hopes that the appointment of a judge is going to be able to change the law.
Obama has said, “…when we open our hearts and our minds to those who may not think like we do or believe what we do - that's when we discover at least the possibility of common ground.
That's when we begin to say, "Maybe we won't agree on abortion, but we can still agree that this is a heart-wrenching decision for any woman to make, with both moral and spiritual dimensions.
So let's work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoption more available, and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term. Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded in clear ethics and sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women."
Understand - I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away. No matter how much we may want to fudge it - indeed, while we know that the views of most Americans on the subject are complex and even contradictory - the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable. Each side will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction. But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature.
Open hearts. Open minds. Fair-minded words.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/17/obama-notre-dame-speech-f_n_204387.html
With warm regards, I hope all is going well with you. I’m trying to tackle one feature of our discussion at a time. It takes a lot of thought to do just one part of our complicated discussion..
Your statement: “What if the US had already legalized the killing of Jews, and it was occurring at an enormous rate—4,000 deaths a day. In the upcoming election, two candidates are running for office. One candidate supports the killing of Jews and promises to enact a bill guaranteeing the slaughter for ages to come. That same candidate also happens to have great ideas about social reform. The other candidate’s ideas on social reform seem lacking. However, he is pro-Jew. He would certainly not expand the killing of Jews and would block any further expansion of such activities. Would you vote for the first candidate? “
Regarding your statement above, I know George, that is I can understand that because you believe, single mindedly, that abortion is the very worst that can occur of anything, this comparison seems true to you. For me this is actually a ridiculous concoction of a comparison. If a candidate promised to kill Jews and guarantee the slaughter for years to come, truly, no one would be able to vote for a candidate using such language because we would all believe it is murder. On the other hand, regarding our discussion of abortion (intrinsic evil) not all people think abortion is murder. Think about the following. Is there a God? Is there an afterlife? Did Jesus Christ found the Catholic Church? We cannot know that for sure. But we have faith that those questions are answered in the positive as absolutely true. However, not all have been given the gift of faith. And their difference with us is an honest one. So I will not judge a person who differs from me as being somehow less perceptive than me because he arrives at a different point of view. Thus I do not agree with your statement that, “Any man who does not see the value of human life at so vulnerable a stage cannot be trusted with the reins of the country.”
In addition, notably, I see the possibility of reducing abortions by a man that speaks as Obama does in the following statements, below this paragraph. I have more hope that abortions can be reduced by the measures he speaks of compared to a leader who only has vague hopes that the appointment of a judge is going to be able to change the law.
Obama has said, “…when we open our hearts and our minds to those who may not think like we do or believe what we do - that's when we discover at least the possibility of common ground.
That's when we begin to say, "Maybe we won't agree on abortion, but we can still agree that this is a heart-wrenching decision for any woman to make, with both moral and spiritual dimensions.
So let's work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoption more available, and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term. Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded in clear ethics and sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women."
Understand - I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away. No matter how much we may want to fudge it - indeed, while we know that the views of most Americans on the subject are complex and even contradictory - the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable. Each side will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction. But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature.
Open hearts. Open minds. Fair-minded words.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/17/obama-notre-dame-speech-f_n_204387.html
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Why are intrinsic evils a government vote and love of fellow man is not?
Hi George,
You are indeed a member of a very loving giving family when it comes to your own personal generosity.
But why do you not feel the same responsibility to follow God's command to love your fellow man by voting. Through our vote we have the greatest opportunity to make some very real changes in the desparate lives of our fellow human beings.
On an aside--
I'm going to get a knee replacement so have patience with my response to you.
If you would like to send me your email address, I can notify you when I have a response for you. I do get notification when you post. My email is sg.mccarthy@verizon.net.
You are indeed a member of a very loving giving family when it comes to your own personal generosity.
But why do you not feel the same responsibility to follow God's command to love your fellow man by voting. Through our vote we have the greatest opportunity to make some very real changes in the desparate lives of our fellow human beings.
On an aside--
I'm going to get a knee replacement so have patience with my response to you.
If you would like to send me your email address, I can notify you when I have a response for you. I do get notification when you post. My email is sg.mccarthy@verizon.net.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)