Senate Democrats have been called on their positions which deny Catholics who actually believe and espouse Church doctrine a position in the judiciary.1
Let's be clear here - Pryor is not being opposed because he has acted on his beliefs. Pryor has not followed Church doctrine to the exclusion of constitutional mandate. In fact, had he done so he would have given a much more expansive interpretation of the Alabama anti partial-birth abortion law. He did not. He tried to bring the statute within the mandates of the constitution not the mandates of the Church.
This is a case of the pain being so great because the arrow has struck too close to home. Nominal Catholics, as demonstrated by Senator Richard J. Durbin, distance themselves as far as they can from Church positions which are unpopular to the Left2. The question which hangs in the air is what is the difference in particular between Durbin and Pryor? Both claim to believe in doctrine but neither has followed it to the exclusion of other obligations. The difference? Pryor doesn't make the law and is honest about his belief that abortions have killed unborn babies. And because of that he will not become a federal judge.
1 Although the ads have actually been run in Republican areas, they clearly target the Democratic obstructionism.
2 This is a bunch of garbage: "Mr. Durbin [is] an Illinois Democrat who personally opposes abortion but backs abortion rights." As a political expediency, I can see remaining neutral - abstaining from votes on abortion matters. But to vote in favor of abortion is to act in direct in contradiction of what you profess, as a Catholic, to believe are Church Laws which reflect the Will of God.
~
No comments:
Post a Comment