EDITORIAL: Abortion, the '800 lb. Gorilla' in the Campaign

Let's be honest, the difference between these two candidates on the most fundamental of all human rights, the right to life, is the "800 lb. Gorilla" in the U.S. Presidential Campaign.

LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) - There is an odd expression in American parlance these days. Perhaps you have heard it, or even used it yourself. The expression: "There is an 800 lb Gorilla in the room".

The phrase is used to refer to those situations when something obvious is present in a conversation, a relationship, or even in a room. However, the participants do not directly address the subject or acknowledge the reality. They act as though something as big as an '800 lb. Gorilla" can remain unmentioned.

The "800 lb. gorilla" in this US Presidential campaign this year is legal abortion, the sanctioning by positive law of something which is intrinsically evil and against the Natural Law. Every procured abortion is the taking of innocent human life in the first home of the whole human race, the mothers womb.

I have written extensively insisting that my position on the fundamental human right to life is not a "single issue" political position. Rather, I maintain that recognizing the dignity of every human life is the foundation for all political considerations. I also insist that the dignity of life is a lens through which all policy issues must be viewed. Without the right to life there are no other rights and the foundation of rights is jeopardized.

I have also written extensively concerning my claim that the Pro-life position is not, in the first instance, a "religious" position. Rather, it is a human position, confirmed by the Natural Law. It is always and everywhere wrong to take innocent human life. We all know it. Science has confirmed what our conscience has always told us, the child in the womb is our neighbor.

I will not re-address those positions in this editorial but refer my readers to review my other articles.

My purpose is to discuss the "800 lb. Gorilla" of unrestricted, "legal" abortion and its prominence in the current race for the Presidency of the United States. It simply cannot be ignored.

The two Major Parties' "presumptive" nominees, Senator Barack Obama and Senator John McCain, are each on the campaign trail, seeking to expand their constituencies. Both are trying to reach beyond the bounds of their core supporters and the loyal political Party faithful in order to appeal to various new groups of voters.

I am not alone in saying that I am deeply disappointed in the current state of affairs in American Politics. Faithful Catholics and other Christians are faced with a wrenching choice, at least if they decide to vote for a candidate from either of the two major Political Parties in the United States.

We can choose between a candidate who has expressed his Pro-Life convictions and has a record of opposition to expanding the availability of abortion, but who also has deficiencies on what should be derivative pro-life positions, Senator McCain.

Or, we can vote for a candidate who has the very worst record in American politics on the issue of Abortion and the right to life but is compelling on some other issues and may be one of the most exciting candidates to arrive on the American political scene for decades, Senator Obama.

However, let's be honest, the difference between these two candidates on the most fundamental of all human rights, the right to life and the first freedom, the freedom to be born, is the "800 lb. Gorilla" in the US Presidential Campaign.

Let's consider the record of these candidates.

Senator John McCain

Senator McCain voted in favor of the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits taxpayer funding of abortion through the Medicaid program. He has voted consistently against Federal funding of abortion. He supported the Ban on so called "Partial Birth Abortion" at the Federal level. He supported the US Supreme Court's decision in Gonzales v Carhart to uphold this Federal Restriction on Abortion on Demand, calling that decision "a victory for those who cherish the sanctity of life."

He has spoken out repeatedly for years against the US Supreme Court's decision of Roe v Wade (and its progeny) which essentially legalized abortion, for any reason, throughout all nine months of pregnancy. He has voted for restrictions on abortions. For example, he supported a bill that would have required an abortionist to notify at least one parent before performing an abortion on a minor girl from another State and is on record in support of a Parental Notification Law.

His rationale for opposing Roe appears to be his philosophy of Federalism and his understanding of the Constitutional separation of powers doctrine. He is on record as supporting the return of the decision on whether or not abortion is "allowed" to the States. He has said "...We would be better off by having Roe v. Wade return to the states....I don't believe the...Court should be legislating in the way that they did on Roe v. Wade."

He does not support a Federal Constitutional Amendment which would recognize that the inalienable right to life applies to all human persons from conception to natural death.

He has voted to support human experimentation, the always deadly research on human embryos which "extracts" their stem cells. In justifying the use of these little humans for their spare parts he has referred to some human embryos as "spare". He voted to allow our tax payer funder dollars to undertake such experimentation on human life. He did claim it was a "difficult" moral decision.

Upon hearing of the advances being made in the arena of adult stem cell research he later declared "I believe that skin stem cell research has every potential very soon of making that discussion [embryonic stem cell research] academic." His campaign website states that he "opposes the intentional creation of human embryos for research purposes."

Senator Barack Obama

Senator Obama rejects the notion that he "supports" abortion. However, he does support an unfettered "abortion right". He is on record supporting the "Freedom of Choice Act". In point of fact, he was one of the co-sponsors of the legislation. That Act would invalidate, at the Federal level, all State and Federal restrictions on abortion.

He has regularly reaffirmed without equivocation his support of the so called "abortion right" saying "I have consistently advocated for reproductive choice and will make preserving women's rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as President." During this campaign he has said that abortion is a "difficult moral issue".

He initially spoke out against restricting even so called "Partial Birth Abortion". Putting his latest comment to a Christian magazine,Relevant,indicating that he is reconsidering his support of the so called "mental health exception" aside, he does have a record on the matter while serving in public office in Illinois which has become the subject of open verbal warfare on the blogs, left and right.

Even giving him the benefit of the doubt that he is beginning to reconsider his support of a "mental health" exception to the Partial Birth Abortion ban, he stated with clarity his opposition to the United States Supreme Court's decision in Gonzales v. Carhart, the April 2007 Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act with these words:

"I am extremely concerned that (it) will embolden state legislatures to enact further measures to restrict a woman's right to choose, and that the conservative Supreme Court justices will look for other opportunities to erode Roe v. Wade."

He voted against legislation in the Illinois State Senate that prohibited taxpayer dollars from being used to pay for abortion. His campaign has stated that he "does not support" the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federal taxpayer funding of abortion through the Medicaid program.

He voted to block a bill that would have required an abortionist to notify at least one parent before performing an abortion on a minor girl from another State.

His position supporting the killing of human embryonic life for experimentation is not all that different than his opponent, Senator McCain. He, like McCain, voted in favor of funding embryonic stem cell research.

However,, Senator Obama went even further noting that "Embryonic stem cells can be obtained from a number of sources including in vitro fertilization. ...We should expand and accelerate research using these embryos..."

So, there is a real clear difference between these two US Presidential candidates on the issue of whether or not the taking of innocent human life through abortion should be protected and sanctioned by the Federal Government.

There is also a difference as to whether the Federal Police Power should enforce this judicially created "right" to do what is wrong.

There is a difference between them on whether there should be limitations on abortions through State and Federal restrictions.

There is also a difference between the approaches that the two candidates will take on the choosing of Justices for the United States Supreme Court.

Neither of these two Presidential candidates is fully "Pro-Life", in the sense of recognizing the objective truth that every procured abortion is the taking of innocent human life and that from the moment of conception the fundamental human right to life attaches. However,Senator McCain recognizes that Roe v Wade is horrid law and must go. He recognizes there is a Right to Life. However, under his notion of Federalism, he believes that if outlawing abortion is to be done, it should occur at the State level.

Neither of them will do what truly must be done, outlaw abortion at the Federal level just like other intentional killing is outlawed.

Neither of these two candidates recognizes that it is always and everywhere wrong to take innocent human life, even at the human embryonic stage, since they both support the so called "extraction" of stem cells for experimentation which is deadly.

However, Senator McCain clearly holds positions which would at least slow the killing of children in the womb and thereby allow more time for those of us who are Pro-life to persuade the American public of the truth that every human life from conception to natural death should be protected under the law.

Conlusion

Over the last few weeks my wife and I had some much needed time to spend with all of our grown children. They know that their father has spent his entire career in struggling to secure what I have always told them was the fundamental human rights issue of our age, the right to life of every single human person from conception to natural death.

They know that I am "whole life/pro-life", embracing the wonderful teaching of the Catholic Church concerning the dignity of every human life from conception to natural death and all in between. I believe that position encompasses a number of other issues concerning our obligations in solidarity to the poor.On many of those, Senator Obama is closer to my own convictions.

They have grown up in a home where, whether in the Courts or the Public Policy arena, writing, speaking or preaching, their father has always proclaimed the Pro-life message.

I was taken with their interest in this Presidential election and their willingness to make political comments. They often avoid the issues and avoid political discussions. I discovered during our time together that they, like a growing number of Americans, are taken with the extraordinary communications skills of Senator Barack Obama.

They, like the majority of their young peers, are also attracted to his message of change.

They did not openly declare whom they will vote for, but some of them are, shall we say, less than enthusiastic over his rival, Senator John McCain. They also know what their Dad believes. They are all "pro-life". Like their Dad, they are disappointed that this election has come down to the current field of candidate options.

This past week, I also watched a film, Juno, with my wife and one of our daughters.This Oscar winning film is brilliant, honest and extraordinarily real.

It paints the realities surrounding an "unplanned" teenage pregnancy, develops the characters with great acting skill and then affirms the humanity of the child in the womb without any veneer of 'religiosity'. Though some of my readers may find some of its "gritty" language and scenes a bit too much for their own children, I absolutely loved the film and recommend it to everyone.

The movie is wonderfully Pro-life. It may actually be one of the best apologetic tools the Pro-life movement has.

I think the best thing that could happen in this current U.S. presidential campaign is for the two major Party candidates to watch this film with their own spouses, in a room, together. It affirms what we all really know, in "our hearts". The child in the womb, as one of Juno's classmates told her "has fingernails". She is one of us. She is our neighbor.

Senator Obama, she is one of the poor whom you purport to care so much about and, like so many whom you have helped in your own career, she has no voice to defend her.

Senator McCain, she is a human person who deserves protection whether she lives in Alabama or Massachusetts.

And to the both of you, she is a human person from the moment of conception and should not be experimented upon in a deadly manner for spare parts.

How I long for the day when abortion no longer enters into our political debates because we have come to our senses and outlawed it. Then, we could give serious consideration to the panorama of other issues which rightly deserve our public discussion.Many of those issues are also Pro-life issues. However, in the hierarchy of values, stopping the killing of the new "holy innocents", children in the womb, must be our first consideration.

I would welcome an American political climate where both major Political Parties opposed abortion for what it is just like they oppose the taking of every other innocent human life.

I have not yet decided who I will vote "for" in this election. I have decided whom I will vote "against". I cannot and will not support any candidate who fails to recognize that abortion is the taking of innocent human life.

I write this article to simply call attention to the "800 lb. Gorilla". Pretending it is not in the room is just plain silly.

---

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

Copyright 2021 - Distributed by Catholic Online