The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionElection results bend toward justice
by Maureen Fiedler on Nov. 09, 2011
The first news to flash across my TV screen last night was about the referendum in Ohio. Voters resoundingly repealed legislation intended to derail the collective bargaining rights of public employee unions. The rights of unions and state workers were vindicated in a landslide. Not only that, the vote sent a message to other states that have done, or are contemplating, similar moves. Hopefully, the message was heard at the national level as well.
Then, the voters in Maine took a decisive step against Republican legislatures that are trying to restrict voting rights. They restored same-day voter registration that had been eliminated by their state legislature.
Next, the president of Arizona's Senate, who was the author of Arizona's hardline immigration law, Rep. Russell Pearce, lost a recall election 53 percent to 45 percent. It's being seen as a bellwether against "extreme" politics.
Later, results came in from Mississippi, which voted down the so-called "Personhood Amendment" to the state constitution.
Now, I realize that the readers of NCR are divided on issues that touch abortion, but this proposition was so unique, and so hardline, that even the Catholic bishops did not support it!
It would have defined a fertilized egg as a legal person. Now, some people might believe that philosophically or theologically, but enacting it into law is another matter. If approved, it would not only have outlawed all abortions (even in cases of rape, incest and saving the life of the mother), it would have outlawed many forms of birth control that prevent implantation as well as the morning-after pill. It would probably have stopped all attempts at in vitro fertilization and stifled the ability of doctors to treat pregnant patients.
It would also have meant that every natural miscarriage would be subject to possible criminal investigation and even prosecution as a potential murder case. Even for some longtime anti-abortion groups (as well as the bishops), this was a bridge too far. And the voters got that message: This would have resulted in gross injustices toward women.
There is hope in these results -- hope that justice is still alive in the psyche of the American voter.
The failure of the personhood
The failure of the personhood amendment is a tragedy for all those who die as a result of abortion, but at least you're happy.
There is hope in these
There is hope in these results -- hope that justice is still alive in the psyche of the American voter.
I agree with you. The purpose of civil law is to ensure that all citizens and residents have access to and support of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." It is there to protect and promote the common good. The purpose of our Christian faith is to guide and lead the common good to holiness by example, to journey together to the Source and Summit of life and love. Our Creator gave us intellect and free will so that each of us can choose to answer our call to holiness. Holiness cannot be legislated or imposed. The law of God is written in our hearts and so we pray, "Lord, give me a pure heart." Jesus said, "I have given you and example to follow." These election results are proof that "There is hope in these results -- hope that justice is still alive in the psyche of the American voter."
Paz y Bien, Rolando, SFO.
POPE'S 2012 FAVORITES .......
POPE'S 2012 FAVORITES ....... Thanks, Maureen, for the interim election analysis. But the papal efforts to help elect a "lower taxes on the Catholic 1%" Republican has just begun. Judging by the initial actions, which included a malicious and toxic theory that the Devil causes homosexuality, the papal effort will be "lite" on justice.
For more information on the pope's efforts, please note the NCR comment and related cross links under the comment heading, "EXORCISING BISHOPS NOW" , accessible by clicking on at:
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/lgbtq-gifts-god .
In 1973 when Roe vs Wade was
In 1973 when Roe vs Wade was passed, there was little technology. Fiedler is old enough to remember. Now almost forty years later, one can detect a heartbeat after a few weeks in the womb. There should be no disagreement among Catholics about abortion. One can still say that it is a woman's choice, buy please don't pretend that there is no life there. There is now in 2011, too much evidence to the contrary.
in the case of rape and
in the case of rape and incest, can we say it is women's choice?
Did she choose to get raped, and/or by a powerful family figure?
In the case of clear and present danger to the mother's life, what is the choice, save the mother and have both die?
just asking
I dunno
why is this the only moral issue around anymore?
economy good?
we have peace?
justice?
equality?
strong families, meaning employment with a living wage?
all the other moral conundrums resolved so now we can idly hypothesize around this one issue only?
Read your Reverend Father Charles Curran, oft awarded Roman Catholic moral theologian
Sounds like you label
Sounds like you label anything as "justice" that lines up nicely with leftist/democrat positions. As far as outlawing abortion in all cases as well as birth control, well, that pretty well lines up with Holy Mother Church's position that both are immoral. Don't see a problem here.
I agree 100% on the defeat of
I agree 100% on the defeat of personhood amendment. The proposed amendment was just too broad and vague.
In regards to the unions, look what the stock market did after the cost of Italy's borrowed money increased. What would happen if one of the big labor states defaulted due to unsustainable pension demands by public unions?
The union justice issue is far more complex than: Good guys (unions) verse bad guys (governors). Lets hope that the victory for the unions does not become bitter sweet. Greece, the Sequel would cost every one.
That is what I don't get
That is what I don't get about the bishops' opposition to the Personhood ammendment. It would have de facto outlawed:
*Abortion - which is always and everwhere gravely immoral
*Abortion under special circumstances of Rape or Incest - no less immoral
*Abortifacients (ie drugs preventing implantation) - see "abortion"
*IUDs - See "abortifacients"
*IVF - Immoral in itself, plus almost necessarily involves abortions which in themselves are immoral.
And note that these are not on the order of a mere private sin, these are the sorts of evils that if committed would constitute a serious civil crime if committed against a person.
The only flaw I really saw in the proposal was nebulous speculation about "stifling physicians" treating pregnant women. While for the most part this is bunk, as prenatal care is ordered to the health of both patients, I could see one issue that could be a problem:
Double-effect cases. There are some rare situations where it is morally acceptable to make a decision that, tragically and in an undesired way, means that either mother or child will die in the effort to save the other's life, or that one will be but in proportionately greater risk in an effort to save both.
Law is a very rigid and blunt knife, it cant help but tear up things surrounding what it intends to cut. This is the case here, banning some rare morally acceptable (and necessary to have in a physician's arsenal) medical options for the sake of protecting the most vulnerable human beings from direct attack.
Jim.. you say... "Law is a
Jim.. you say... "Law is a very rigid and blunt knife'
I agree.. that's why being pro-life can also be against using the law's 'blunt knife' to enforce what we Catholics want done. Who is calling for the law to be enforced as wanted. i.e. Imprisonment for doctors, nurses mothers, fathers ect for how long. To not answer this is just cheap talking.
Post new comment