The Independent News Source
Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Demonizing pro-life Democrats
Jun. 23, 2009
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF version
Joe Feuerherd
Printer-friendly versionSend to friendPDF versionIs there room in the Obama governing coalition for pro-life Democrats? The president personally provided the answer to that question, a resounding yes, in his speech at the University of Notre Dame last month. Others are not so sure.
The issue arises most recently with the recent appointment of Alexia Kelley as director of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships at the Department of Health and Human Services.
Kelley is the founder of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, a Washington-based group that “promotes increased awareness of Catholic social teaching through the media and provides opportunities for Catholics and citizens of goodwill to advance the common good in the public square.”
Catholics in Alliance, from its outset, took a decidedly “seamless garment” bent to the issues. From its Web site: “We support a consistent culture of life that includes protections for unborn children; implementation of social, economic and material supports for pregnant women and vulnerable families; and protections for children from abuse, poverty and neglect.”
Catholics in Alliance was among the groups in the 2008 campaign that successfully broadened the Catholic political playing field, which redounded to the benefit of Democrats in key states such as Ohio. Obama won the overall Catholic vote and drew nearly even with John McCain among those -- a targeted constituency for Republicans -- who attend Mass on a weekly or more frequent basis.
But election coalitions, where most everyone is welcome in the interest of defeating the opponent, are different from governing coalitions, where actual programs and policies are implemented. Once united in their support of candidate or cause, interest groups fray as the poetry of politics is translated into the prose of governance.
So today we have Catholics for Choice, a Washington-based organization that favors abortion rights, condemning Kelley’s appointment. “In appointing an anti-choice advocate to a key position in Health and Human Services we are seeing crucial principles abandoned -- principles upon which so many men and women rely to lead healthy lives,” said Jon O’Brien, the group’s president. Kelley, says O’Brien, is an “anti-choice advocate” because she favors programs that would reduce the need for abortion while abandoning the “principle” of “support for abortion rights.” Stalinists versus Trotskyites was less arcane.
Meanwhile, in a 28-page Catholics for Choice report, we are told that Catholics in Alliance “maintains [emphasis added] that it is a separate entity from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.” Further, says the report, Catholics in Alliance “reveal[ed] its true colors” by quoting Pope John Paul II in a letter to the editor of The Washington Post last year. This demonstrated, according to the report, that Catholics in Alliance “is at one with one of the most anti-choice popes in the modern era on abortion.”
The implication that Catholics in Alliance is somehow an adjunct of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (presumably because Kelley and other staff once worked there) is just plain silly. It is either an attempt to mislead the ignorant and those inclined to think ill of the church or it is an abysmal analysis of the dynamic under which Catholic groups in this country operate.
Further, the idea that a Catholic organization might quote a pope is hardly surprising. One wonders: Were they supposed to cite, rather than “one of the most anti-choice popes” in recent memory, a pontiff who favored legal abortion? Good luck with that Nexis search.
Still, the pro-choice element of the Democrat governing coalition (and, don’t kid yourself, it remains the dominant voice in the party on the issue of abortion) is right to be concerned. They need an enemy, a person -- a walking caricature like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson or a right-wing Catholic bishop -- to make their case. Today, with a popular president who embraces both Roe v. Wade (meaning there is no legal threat to abortion) and efforts to reduce the abortion rate, they are left to demonize a progressive woman whose entire career has revolved around promoting the common good.
To the degree that Democrats (and all Americans) embrace the idea that abortion is a tragedy to be avoided, and not a right to be celebrated, the professional pro-choice movement (like their counterparts among antiabortion groups) is in for a difficult time.
Joe Feuerherd is NCR publisher. He can be reached at jfeuerherd@ncronline.org.
Pro-life Democrats...now
Pro-life Democrats...now there's an oxymoron!!! Sorry square circle but you're out as the dictionary illustration for oxymoron.
At least Joe is honest enough to state the obvious...
"Still, the pro-choice element of the Democrat governing coalition (and, don’t kid yourself, it remains the dominant voice in the party on the issue of abortion)"
...but alas, he's not honest enough to be consistent with his terminology. He uses "pro-life" as in "pro-life Democrats" when it suits him, but "pro-choice" and "anti-abortion" when it suits him also..
"the professional pro-choice movement (like their counterparts among antiabortion groups) is in for a difficult time."
...Note to Joe...the issue is "abortion", not "choice". God is pro-choice, He gave us free will but He wants us to choose good over evil. You have chosen "evil", as in "Democratis Party". The professional pro-choice movement, AKA the pro-abortion movement, AKA the Democratic Party is NOT in for a difficult time just so long as there are millions of so-called pro-life
Catholics, who sell their souls in order to support pro-abortion politicians like BHO.
The premise of this article
The premise of this article is rubbish. It should be pro-lifers that question how committed Alexia Kelley and Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good are to the cause, for this author to overlook this is ridiculous. Catholics in Alliance and Alexia Kelley have defended John Edwards when his campaign staffers posted anti-Catholic statements has supported numerous pro-abortion platforms and candidates, and have had their voter guides condemed. One look on the website of this group will tell anyone paying attention that abortion isn't very important to these people, you have to do a search just to find it and then in most cases we're just given the old "this is one issue among many" type retoric. Why not do an article on REAL pro-life Democrats like those associated with Democrats for Life?
Like Inspector Renault, the
Like Inspector Renault, the French police official in the movie “Casablanca”, who was “shocked” to discover that gambling is going on in the casino, Joe Feuerherd is “shocked” to discover that pro-life Democrats are being demonized.
“Pro-choicers” and their media allies like to project “pro-choice” activists as being open to dialogue, when in fact the exact opposite is true. More often than not, it seems that it is the pro-abortion side that opposes civil debate. Of course, one of the most notorious examples was when Governor Robert Casey of Pennsylvania was denied a speaking slot at the 1992 Democratic convention because of his anti abortion views. But this was not an anomaly. Father Richard Neuhaus in reviewing a book by Jon Shields called, The Democratic Virtues of the Christian Right writes how, “the college campus efforts of (pro-life students) meet frequently with vicious hostility, often led by faculty members. The truth is that such hostility reflects vehement opposition to civil deliberation and argument about abortion. Pro-life students eager to engage others in serious discussion find this very frustrating, but not entirely surprising. Shields writes: ‘Such frustration is fueled by NARAL Pro-Choice America and Planned Parenthood, whose leaders discourage their campus affiliates from debating, or even talking to pro-life students. NARAL’s ‘Campus Kit for Pro-Choice Organizers’ for example, gives this categorical message ‘Don’t waste time talking to anti-choice people.’ The campus organizer for Planned Parenthood told Shields that she ‘discourages direct debate’”.
Father Neuhaus provides further examples: “pro-abortion intolerance of discussion or debate is sometimes given dramatic expression… (such as when , San Francisco) Supervisor Bevan Duffy declared that pro-lifers were ‘not welcome in San Francisco.’… The head of the Golden Gate Chapter of Planned Parenthood was outraged that activists ‘have been so emboldened that they believe that their message will be tolerated here.’” These are just a few examples.
“Pro-choice” advocates are interested in maintaining the current regime of unlimited abortion on demand and they have little incentive to engage in any real debate; hence, the President’s pretense of listening. True discussion could change the status quo, which is not this Administration’s desired outcome. So Mr. Feuerherd, when you walk into Rick’s Café American do not be surprised to find gambling, and when you walk into a room full of Democratic Party “pro-choice” activists do not be surprised to find any meaningful opportunities for expressing opposing viewpoints stifled.
The 2006 spokesman for
The 2006 spokesman for Catholics for the Alliance for the Common Good pled guilty of 2 counts of compelling prostitution of a 17 year old on the internet. This is a liberal organization so the pro death people should not be concerned.
Post new comment