Editorial: An Issue focused Approach to Presidential Race

As the U.S. Presidential campaign continues and the field narrows, the challenge of choosing a candidate grows more difficult.

LOS ANGELES (Catholic Online) - When the primary campaign began in the American Presidential contest, I wrote a series of articles on issues which concern me as a Catholic citizen, using those issues as a vehicle for articulating the principles of Catholic Social teaching.

As the Editor of Catholic Online, I sought and received interviews with several of the candidates, Governor Huckabee, Senator Thompson and Governor Romney. The other Republican candidates did not reply; nor did any of the Democratic candidates.

In one case, that of Governor Mike Huckabee, the candidate even granted a subsequent interview when he was improperly accused of being anti-Catholic.

All of those interviews were published on Catholic Online and were widely viewed.However, none of those candidates are still running.

In my writings, I regularly attempt to engage the remaining political candidates by addressing public policy issues from the perspective of Catholic Social teaching.

Let me now share with my readers how I am personally approaching that exercise in this current campaign as it relates to the present candidates.

First, I will share a few examples. Then, I will address several of the critical issues.

The current frontrunner of the Democratic Party, Senator Barack Obama is certainly an inspiring orator. He is also prone to using thoughtful notions in his rhetoric such as speaking of an "empathy deficit" in our Nation.

He has demonstrated an apparently genuine concern for the poor. However, he has stopped his ears to the cry of those whom Mother Teresa rightly called the "poorest of the poor", children in the womb. If he becomes the nominee, I will do all I can to continue to engage him on this very issue.

I have repeatedly suggested in my writings that he needs to expand his message of hope to include giving the hope of birth to our littlest neighbors. I have also encouraged him to expand his view of the poor to include the whole human family, especially those smallest neighbors in the womb.

Senator Obama gave an address during the earlier part of his campaign wherein he decried what he called an "epidemic of violence". After that, I suggested that this epidemic begins in the womb, where the lives of innocent children are taken without them having any protection.

I am not sure that he reads my writing. However, I also have tried to reach out to his campaign and will continue to make efforts to do so.

As for his opponent for the Democratic nomination, Senator Hilary Clinton, I have tried to do the same.

Like Senator Obama, her campaign has not yet agreed to my requested interview. However, I have engaged in an issue focused discussion as well.

For example, when she proposed a "baby bond" for all newborn children, I wrote an article in which I suggested that she include children in the womb.

Of course many people questioned the notion from a perspective of whether that approach is a proper role for the federal Government at all. Though that is a valid discussion, good Catholics can legitimately disagree on that issue.

However, I presumed that she was sincere, chose not to get into a debate over what is really an issue of the application of subsidiarity, and instead used her proposal to address the greater issue, compassion for all children, including those in the womb.

This gave me the opportunity to address the fundamental human rights issue of our age, the right to life and the first freedom, the freedom to be born. To my surprise, one of her supporters contacted me to express appreciation for what they thought was a thoughtful piece.

However, my efforts at an interview have, as of yet, been unsuccessful.

The presumptive nominee of the Republican Party, Senator John McCain, fares better on the issue of protecting the right to life for children in the womb. He opposes the so called "abortion right" and at least recognizes the right to life for our neighbors in the womb.

However, he still endorses deadly research and experimentation on human embryonic life. He attempts to justify this barbarism with reference to the fact that these human embryos will inevitably die in this unethical research, calling them "spare embryos".

When human persons become objects to be disposed of for parts, we have simply embraced a new form of slavery where an entire class of persons has become less than human.

Catholic Social teaching is what I like to call "whole life, pro-life" and so am I.

I absolutely oppose the taking of innocent human life in the first home of the entire human race, the womb. Science has confirmed what our conscience has long known; the child in the womb is our neighbor. It is always and everywhere intrinsically evil to take innocent human life.

I will not support any candidate who is wrong on this issue because it is more than an issue; it is a framework through which I believe that we should view all other issues.

Senator Obama is wrong to support legalized abortion. So is Senator Clinton. However, it is also intrinsically evil to "manufacture" human embryonic life to then kill that life for spare parts. So, Senator McCain is wrong in his support for deadly research on human embryonic life.

Then, I move beyond innocent human life. All three current candidates support Capital Punishment.

Catholic Social teaching opposes its use as no longer necessary or justified. This is a different moral analysis than abortion. The church does not say that Capital Punishment is intrinsically evil, whereas abortion is.

I oppose Capital Punishment. I accept the now revised teaching of both the Catholic Catechism and the modern encyclical letters that it is no longer defensible because it is no longer necessary to protect society or preserve life and it does not promote the common good. Bloodless means are available to protect society, "punish" the criminal and serve the common good.

Also, as a former prosecutor, I know that there is simply no doubt that mistakes have been made in its application. We have executed the innocent. So, I believe that mercy should trump justice. Vengeance is never ours.

Next, I consider the first society, marriage and the family founded upon it.

There is also difference between the candidates on marriage. Marriage must be defended and protected from the current assault against the institution. Marriage is what it is and we all know it. There is a word used in Philosophical and theological discourse to speak about the nature of things. It is the word "ontology". It refers to the essence of something. There is an "ontology" to marriage.

A cabbage is not a rock. A dog is not a human person. Homosexual relationships and the sexual acts accompanying such relationships cannot ever constitute a marriage. They are not capable of being open to the fullness of the love that is at the foundation of the unitive nature of marriage and for which even our bodies are constituted, that is the total gift of self to the other in faithful, lifelong love.

Nor can homosexual acts, or the relationships formed around them, ever be procreative, open to new life in children. Social groupings built on such relationships are also not families.

There is an effort underway to categorize those who still support this objective reality as uncaring, bigoted or antiquated. We are not. We want to promote the common good.

Marriage and the family founded upon it are the future of freedom. Redefining marriage and family will not help anyone, including those who are self defined homosexuals. It is also destructive of the social order. Marriage and the family built upon it is the solid foundation of civil society. It is the first vital cell of that society.

Of course all persons must be treated with human dignity and not be discriminated against and that includes homosexual persons. However, there are other ways to protect against discrimination than the current efforts to redefine the fundamental social institution of marriage, the defining cornerstone of our social order.

To destroy marriage through redefining the word in some verbal form of alchemy, especially under the guise of "tolerance", is dangerous and corrosive to the common good and horribly intolerant of those who feel as I do.

As for the candidate's positions on the host of other issues, let me address a few more, through the lens of the principles which are set forth in Catholic Social teaching.

I have addressed the issue of the initial incursion into Iraq at length. I have opposed it from the beginning. It was not, in my opinion and in the clear position taken by the last two Pope's a "Just war".

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, in its Section on the Fifth Commandment, has an excellent summary on "Safeguarding Peace" and "Avoiding War" (See Paragraphs 2302-2317). In that section, the so called "Just War Theory" is well explained.

I opposed the pre-emptive war in Iraq. I rejected then- and still reject - any notion of a "pre-emptive" war as ever being acceptable under any analysis of the Just War teaching within the Catholic tradition. Like all Americans, I believe that prudence and justice now require that we assist the people of Iraq in their hour of great need.

When the primaries are over and the two candidates emerge, this is a vital issue for all Catholics, other Christians and all concerned people to seriously consider.

At the outset of this last war, under the leadership of our last great Pope, John Paul II, the Church opposed the incursion into Iraq. Our current Pope has taken the same position.

The efforts to change the mind of the Servant of God John Paul II by neo-conservative Michael Novak were totally ineffective. Anyone who says that the Church did not oppose the initial foray into Iraq is simply wrong, or engaging in verbal gymnastics masquerading as prudential judgment.

Next, I am deeply concerned that in the wealthiest Nation on earth we still have not solved the very real health care crisis.

I personally dread the idea of a "nationalized" solution because big Government has not proven itself to be very efficient nor is it very good at compassion and care. That is part of why I have so strongly supported the "faith based" and community initiative of the current administration as a part of fulfilling our national obligation to the poor.

Churches and religious institutions ARE good at compassion and care and need to be seen as partners in solidarity! The principle of subsidiarity, which holds that government is best when it is closest to those being governed, and the principle of solidarity, that reminds us of our obligations to one another and that we are our "brothers (and sisters) keeper", have found a wonderful meeting place in this great new (really quite old) initiative. I believe that it is fresh, creative public policy.

We MUST now find the creative solutions to providing health care for all Americans. We can not delay any longer.

The "market" alone will not solve this crisis without leadership. I have an ever increasing disdain for what is properly called in Catholic Social teaching "economism", an approach to economic issues which somehow posits "freedom" as best advanced through a kind of economic Darwinism.

Freedom is a good of the person. Our market economy is a tremendous vehicle for freedom but it must always be placed at the service of the person, the family and the common good. We simply MUST hear the cry of the poor! We cannot ascribe to a notion of an "invisible hand" which may, if not guided, strangle the poor.

Expanding economic participation to all is a vital part of making sure that "free" is the operative description before the phrase market economy! That must be true in our international economic relationships as well.

You can see just from what I have written that I am neither Republican nor Democrat, nor am I "liberal" or "conservative." I am, however, very politically engaged.

I am also not ready to join any of the current "Third Party" efforts, though I have "flirted" with the notion of starting one, based on the great principles of Catholic Social teaching. I feel that it will throw away my vote at this time.

I also cannot "opt" to "not vote" -as a growing number of people whom I respect are choosing to do.

I will vote. Based upon the discussion above, here are some reasons why.

The next occupant of the Whitehouse will choose at least one Supreme Court Justice. That choice will, at least in this Constitutional lawyers mind, determine whether the current "culture of death" hiding under the profane precedent of Roe v Wade will take another generation of our children before they are able to breathe our air and be welcomed into our family.

The next President will be called upon to provide the genuinely moral leadership so desperately needed to prevent the new cultural revolutionaries from eliminating marriage and family from its favored social status by equalizing homosexual and heterosexual relationships outside of marriage and using the power of the State to enforce this new order.

The next President will be called upon to extract our troops from Iraq, while also ensuring that the Iraqi people, who have suffered so greatly from the War and what led up to it, are given the help they need to rebuild from the devastation of the last five years.

The next President will have an opportunity to solve the health care crisis, expand economic opportunity, bring our troops home from Iraq with honor and dignity and continue to open up our market, and our National embrace to the poor in all of their manifestations.

This is an extraordinarily important election. I have repeatedly expressed in my writing that God is not a Republican, nor is God a Democrat....and, neither am I.

However, I will continue to follow this campaign with great interest. I hope we all do. I will pray, study the Church's Social teaching,form my conscience,analyze and then I will vote.

There is too much at stake.

This article is adapted from Deacon Fournier's booklet entitled "Catholics, Voting and the Common Good" available through Catholic Online

---

'Help Give every Student and Teacher FREE resources for a world-class Moral Catholic Education'

Copyright 2021 - Distributed by Catholic Online