Wednesday, June 06, 2007

On politicians who oppose abortion personally but...

Bp. +Tobin (the guy in purple)

One of my pet peeves is those who say I am a good (fill in the religious group of your choice) and am morally opposed to abortion but I don't think it's my place to impose my will on others. That little confession may sound odd since I do tend to be more libertarian in my politics than some. But I draw the line at killing children because they are inconvenient or almost any of the other lame reasons advanced in defense of this abhorrent practice. Anyways the Roman Catholic Bishop of Rhode Island recently wrote an op-ed piece on this subject targeting Rudy Giuliani. For the record I don't have anything personal against Mr. Giuliani. But his position on life makes it impossible for me to support him. If he gains the nomination of the Republican Party, I may have to consider voting for him as the lesser of evils. But that would only be because there are no pro-life Democrats running. However I digress.

The bishop made what I thought was a very powerful indictment against those who hold positions of public trust and use the power that comes with it to promote a right to kill children. (The issue of those children being born or not is utterly irrelevant.) The comments he makes are pointed. But they are on target.
Rudy’s public proclamations on abortion are pathetic and confusing. Even worse, they’re hypocritical.

Now, this is what we get from Rudy as he attempted to explain his ambiguous position on abortion in a speech at Houston Baptist College earlier this month: “Here are the two strong beliefs that I have, here are the two pillars of my thinking . . . One is, I believe abortion is wrong. I think it is morally wrong . . . The second pillar that guides my thinking . . . where [people of good faith] come to different conclusions about this, about something so very, very personal, I believe you have to respect their viewpoint. You give them a level of choice here . . . I’ve always believed both of these things.”

What? This drivel from the man who received high marks, and properly so, for his clear vision and personal courage in healing New York City, and by extension the nation, after the horrific terrorist attacks of September 11?

Rudy mentions the two pillars of his position. But you know what happens if you sit on a stool with two legs? Yep, it collapses. And so does Rudy’s position, and along with it his integrity and reputation.

Rudy’s explanation is a classic expression of the position on abortion we’ve heard from weak-kneed politicians so frequently in recent years:

“I’m personally opposed to but don’t want to impose my views on other people.” The incongruity of that position has been exposed many times now. As I’ve asked previously, would we let any politician get away with the same pathetic cop-out on other issues: “I’m personally opposed to . . . racial discrimination, sexual abuse, prostitution, drug abuse, polygamy, incest . . . but don’t want to impose my beliefs on others?”

Why is it that when I hear someone explaining this position, I think of the sad figure of Pontius Pilate in the Gospels, who personally found no guilt in Jesus, but for fear of the crowd, washed his hands of the whole affair and handed Jesus over to be crucified. I can just hear Pilate saying, “You know, I’m personally opposed to crucifixion but I don’t want to impose my belief on others.”

I really want to post the whole thing. It's that good. But of course copyright etc. So I will just strongly recommend the entire article. Well said Bp. +Tobin!

No comments: