The President has very little control over the legality of abortion. It should not be a significant campaign issue.
Abortion is a highly charged emotional issue. Many people oppose abortion, under any circumstances. Others think it is just fine in all circumstances. Still others think it is OK in some, but not all circumstances. These, I submit, are "givens." What I don't understand is why abortion is a major issue in the Presidential race, since there is very little the President can do to grant the wish of any group vis a vis abortion.…
Article comments
76 - Zedd
Dan Miller,
Oh my goodness you scared me. I thought what happened to Dan? He is so reasonable. Even if he doesn't agree with you he always has a solid argument.
Dan,
"Dan Miller: easily offended *and* disagreeable, yet intriguingly reasonless."
Wow, what an assessment. Oh now everything comes together. This is your dumb alter ego. It's too taxing being sharp all of the time.
77 - Clavos
virtually all living things capable of communication consider not being killed a positive thing
How, exactly, do embryos communicate?
78 - Zedd
Dan,
Not sure why I am bothering....
"virtually all living things capable of communication consider not being killed a positive thing"
Are you suggesting that embryos ponder things? Every entity does what it does unless there is a malfunction. The embryo has no other function but to evolve into a baby unless there is some sort of malfunction. Much like a seeds function to turn into a plant. A seed is not a plant. A seed does not have a desire to be a plant, it is a seed. At some stage it ceases to be a seed and becomes a plant. When it becomes a plant, it is no longer a seed and cant express what seeds feel because it doesn't remember, it is a completely different entity. It is a plant. Does that help?
79 - Baronius
I see that Nancy Pelosi went on Meet The Press and misrepresented the Catholic position on abortion. And now we've got Biden on the ticket, and the incompatibility between his religion and his politics is sure to come up.
So there's another reason for Dan why abortion is an issue: because once something becomes an issue, it's likely to stay an issue unless we come to a national consensus on it. Do you see a consensus emerging on abortion? 'Cause I sure don't.
Actually, that's not exactly true. We could probably get 90% of the population to agree to an open season first term, rape/incest/maternal life exceptions for second and third term. But it would be next to impossible to get a vote on such a thing.
80 - Dan Miller
Baronius,
Here is a link to the interview with Speaker Pelosi. Although I claim no solid foundation in Roman Catholic doctrine, she certainly appears to me as well to have misstated it as to both contraception and abortion. It is my understanding that a public person who professes the Roman Catholic faith but nevertheless openly advocates abortion rights is subject to being denied the sacrament of communion. Contraception may be in a different category; I don't know.
Personally, I could not remain a member of an organization to the very strongly advocated doctrines of which I did not subscribe; it strikes me as dishonest to do so. However, that has little relevance here, with one exception. I do seriously question the integrity of someone who professes to be a Roman Catholic but nevertheless advocates abortion rights and/or contraception. The Roman Catholic church seems, however, to be rather more pragmatic -- I haven't heard much about Mafia leaders being excommunicated. I attempted to deal with this situation in an earlier article, and see no point in revisiting the matter further here.
I agree that abortion rights are an issue in the Presidential race because, well, because they are an issue. My point was that since a president has little more power to change the rules concerning abortion than he has, for example, to prohibit or encourage tornadoes, earthquakes or hurricanes, it should not be an issue, and certainly should not be a decisive issue.
Were there an overwhelming national consensus on abortion, which seems very unlikely, perhaps a Constitutional amendment might be in order. Without that, or an equally unlikely Roe v. Wade change based on Constitutional reinterpretation (as distinguished from the revisiting of medical technology), I think we are stuck with Roe v. Wade, like it or not. And, were there to be a reinterpretation of Roe v. Wade, I think it would be up to the States to implement the change, not the President or the Congress.
Dan(Miller)
81 - Dan
Zedd: "Not sure why I am bothering...."
Probably because you are confused by a logical inference.
Maybe Dan Miller is right, blogcritics commentors can't be trusted to identify the commentor by the heading at the top of the comment. He should probably sign off with his last name and perhaps periodically remind readers in the body of the comment as well.
"I see that Nancy Pelosi went on Meet The Press and misrepresented the Catholic position on abortion."
That's a generous way to phrase it.
Not Dan Miller
82 - Baronius
Pelosi didn't lie about church teaching, but she distorted the heck out of it. The Catholic Church doesn't claim authority about matters of science (such as when life begins) but does about matters of faith and morals (such as whether abortion is morally permissible). The question couldn't have been phrased better for her. She was able to muddy the question of science, then jump to the Roe decision as a basis for morality.
I'm surprised that she joined the fray on contraception. That's the Dems' new strategy: present any opposition to abortion as a slippery slope toward the abolition of contraception. First of all, the argument is false. But secondly, there are people who believe that contraception is wrong. It's like trying to convince a Southern Baptist that marijuana should be legal, because consistency would demand that alcohol be illegal too. He'll say "fine".
You should know this as a lawyer. It used to be that the idea of suing tobacco companies was ridiculed, becuase that would mean we could sue fast food restaurants for making us fat. In a sane society, that would be the end of the argument. Nowadays, we're suing both.
83 - Baronius
Darn. I forgot I was going to sign that last comment:
Baronius (Miller)
84 - Dr Dreadful
Baronius and Dan, I'm not sure that she did misrepresent it. Popes and other Church luminaries including, as Pelosi rightly pointed out, St Augustine, have decreed or suggested various benchmarks over the years.
I'm certain, however, that she did misrepresent the GOP's position on contraception. That was pure grandstanding.
85 - Dan Miller
Baronius,
In a sane society, that would be the end of the argument. Nowadays, we're suing both. Yep. There is lots of lunacy around. It probably has to do with the chemtrails.
Dan(Miller)
86 - Dr Dreadful
Dan (Miller), would you happen to know if an abortion can be induced by the wearing of a tinfoil hat?
Dr (Dreadful)
87 - Dan Miller
Dr (Dreadful),
I think it has a lot to do with how and where you (probably not you, but a pregnant female) wear it. Perhaps if used in a rhythmic fashion it might work. And, of course, wearing a tinfoil hat in the anatomically correct place might well prevent conception. There should be a Federally funded study of these weighty issues.
Dan(Miller)
88 - Baronius
Dread - Pelosi didn't technically lie, but she presented the varying opinions about when life begins as if they represented varying opinions about the immorality of abortion. The Catholic Church has always treated abortion as a sin. The only diffences of opinion are whether or not it is equivalent to homicide, and whether or not it automatically excommunicates the recipient and practitioner.
Would you have gotten that from Pelosi's statement? I sure wouldn't have.
89 - Dr Dreadful
I saw it as a fair attempt to reconcile her faith with her secular ideology. I agree that the Church's position today is, as Brokaw reminded her, pretty unequivocal. Historically, however, that has by no means been the case.
How harshly you want to judge her depends, I suppose, on whether you think a Catholic should embrace all the articles of their faith, or that it's OK if they disagree with a few of them and still call themselves Catholic.
90 - Baronius
Dread - You're wrong. It simply isn't the case that the Church has changed its position on abortion, ever. And the Church claims teaching authority, so if you deny any of its teachings, you are denying the authority by which it declares all its teachings. You cease to be a Catholic.
Now, as Dan(Miller) correctly points out, the Church doesn't go around stamping "HERETIC" on everyone's foreheads, because it would take too long, and hardly persuade people. Sometimes people drift in and out of orthodoxy, as I did in my youth. But the Church has very specific teachings, and has the right to excommunicate members who deny those teachings.
91 - Baronius
Let me be more specific, Doc. That site you linked to pointed out that the Church has always condemned abortion as evil. It discussed the question of ensoulment, which is what Pelosi alluded to, and discussed the question of automatic excommunication. (Actually, the site did a pretty comprehensive job.) The one item which it represents as allowing abortion is the Apostolic Constitutions (of 400AD). The truth is, the Constitutions were not official teaching, and it was far more harsh about abortion than the Church has ever been.
92 - Dan Miller
According to the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Washington, Speaker Pelosi was wrong.
Speaker Pelosi had not responded to the Archbishop's comments when the linked article was published.Dan(Miller)
93 - El Bicho
"The Catholic Church doesn't claim authority about matters of science (such as when life begins) but does about matters of faith and morals"
After the exposure of their handling of sex scandals with priests, why anyone would continue to grant them such authority in morals is beyond me.
94 - Andy Marsh
Baronius - can you tell me wher I can get one of those heretic stamps? Or at least where I can get stamped?
95 - Dr Dreadful
Baronius, I'm not claiming that the Church hasn't always opposed abortion. But the article I linked to does point out that there has been debate in the past as to when life begins. In particular, there was a prevailing view during the Middle Ages that it began at the quickening - the first time the mother felt the child stir in her womb. As I said, I think this is where Pelosi was coming from in the interview with Brokaw.
Personally, I must say that I don't give a monkey's what the Catholic Church says about it - it is, as Dan (Miller) argues, something of a red herring.
96 - Jet
Uh... Guys, we're talking about a woman's right that is protected under the U.S. Constitution... aren't we?
97 - Dan Miller
Now the Roman Catholic archbishop of Denver has rather strongly suggested that pro-choice VP candidate Biden refrain from taking communion:
It must be difficult to have one leg on one side of a river and the other leg on the other side. Oh well, ain't my problem.Dan(Miller)
98 - Dan Miller
Jet,
That's my understanding.
Dan(Miller)
99 - Jet
This is the same Holy Catholic Church that condemned Galileo with all of his ingenuity and intellect in 1616 for heresy by the learned and sacred Pope for merely suggesting that the Earth wasn’t God’s intended center of the universe and in fact we orbited the Sun instead of it orbiting us" a "fact" backed up by a religion that only after more than three hundred and fifty years of careful consideration, has finally and just recently admitted that it was wrong about the long-dead astronomer.
100 - Dan Miller
Jet,
Ah, yes. But that was then and this is now. Cf Obama-Ayers connection. Besides, it probably doesn't matter what the Roman Catholic Church did almost four hundred years ago, or who Senator Obama's rather more recent associates may have been. Let us all go forward, not backward, together. Peace be upon you and yours.
Dan(Miller)
101 - Jet
Uh... Dan the Catholic church only recently admited it was wrong about Galiled. The point was that they take hundreds of years to admit they're wrong.
102 - Clavos
The point was that they take hundreds of years to admit they're wrong.
A valid point, but relevant only to Catholics, since no one else in the world is bound by their dogma.
103 - Christopher Rose
Other people may not be bound by their dogma, Clavos, but there are secondary effects, such as the drag on society as a whole caused by these cults.
104 - Clavos
Too bad. They have a right to them, at least in this country.
105 - Jet
Good point Chris, I've always suspected that southern baptists didn't really object to abortion until they needed the Catholic's support in the "Religious Right" political movement.
I mean the south does have a well-deserved reputation for cousins dating each other.
Whoops was that a stereotype?
I'm so ashamed!
106 - Baronius
Dread and Dan - Let me try this one more time. Pelosi didn't lie about the Catholic position about when life begins. That was correct. Then she stated the Democratic position on the need to keep abortion legal. That directly conflicts with her church.
Jet - The Catholic Church doesn't claim teaching authority on matters of science. Galileo wasn't charged with scientific error. He was charged with denying the Church's authority on a matter of faith. There was some bogus evidence in the trial, and that's why the Church has apologized.
Bicho - There's a difference between having authority to teach about morals and being a good person. Sometimes, a huge difference.
Andy - It sounds like Chaput has dusted off his heresy stamp. But you can only get stamped if you're a Catholic. A lot of the recent comments are right that this stuff is an internal matter, and shouldn't affect non-Catholics. It does show hypocrisy though. And when people misrepresent the teachings of the Church in the public square, it's fair to call them on it.