MR. BROKAW: Two weeks ago I interviewed Senator Nancy Pelosi–she’s the speaker of the House, obviously–when she was in Denver. When Barack Obama appeared before Rick Warren, he was asked a simple question: When does life begin? And he said at that time that it was above his pay grade. That was the essence of his question. When I asked the speaker what advice she would give him about when life began, she said the church has struggled with this issue for a long time, especially in the last 50 years or so. Her archbishop and others across the country had a very strong refutation to her views on all this; I guess the strongest probably came from Edward Cardinal Egan, who’s the Archbishop of New York. He said, “Anyone who dares to defend that they may be legitimately killed because another human being `chooses’ to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the name.” Those are very strong words. If Senator Obama comes to you and says, “When does life begin? Help me out here, Joe,” as a Roman Catholic, what would you say to him?
SEN. BIDEN: I’d say, “Look, I know when it begins for me.” It’s a personal and private issue. For me, as a Roman Catholic, I’m prepared to accept the teachings of my church. But let me tell you. There are an awful lot of people of great confessional faiths–Protestants, Jews, Muslims and others–who have a different view. They believe in God as strongly as I do. They’re intensely as religious as I am religious. They believe in their faith and they believe in human life, and they have differing views as to when life–I’m prepared as a matter of faith to accept that life begins at the moment of conception. But that is my judgment. For me to impose that judgment on everyone else who is equally and maybe even more devout than I am seems to me is inappropriate in a pluralistic society. And I know you get the push back, “Well, what about fascism?” Everybody, you know, you going to say fascism’s all right? Fascism isn’t a matter of faith. No decent religious person thinks fascism is a good idea.
Read it all (there is a video link available for those who desire it also).
OK, don’t IMPOSE your judgment on others, but at least argue vigorously in support of your judgment. Take a stand, Joe. If you don’t accept the teaching of your church, have the courage to say so. If you do accept the teaching of your church, have the courage to defend it.
And if Sen. Biden really does accept the teachings of his church and continues to vote for abortion legislation (which he has, repeatedly), he then approves of murder. If you truly believe life begins at conception, to vote to end that life means you agree with murder. Very contradictory statements from him – but then it is the political season – does he really think this makes sense??
Apply these arguments to anything Biden really believes in and see what he says. This is intellectual, religious and political fraud.
And, of course, Warren didn’t ask Obama when live begins, but when a baby is entitled to human rights, a political question. Here’s a useful discussion of the [url=http://www.getreligion.org/?p=3899#comments]subject. Note comment #7[/url].
Whoops – forgot this – I recommend to everyone (not just Roman Catholics), this book – Render Unto Caesar: Serving the Nation by Living our Catholic Beliefs in Political Life by Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver for a discussion and better understanding of faith in public life and decision-making.
So, Joe Biden says that he believes that human life begins at conception but then says that that is simply his opinion, and he won’t “impose” it on anyone. This is an absolutely shocking statement.
Biden essentially says “yes I believe that an unborn child is a human being, but who cares? I don’t believe that all human beings have human rights.” What Biden needs to do is to explain why the most vulnerable human beings should have no legal rights, and how that squares with the rest of his political philosophy.
Sure. And I believe that 65 year old senators from Delaware are human beings with a right to life. But for me to impose that judgement on everyone else would be wrong. Sure.
And, speak of the devil – Archbishop Chaput (whose book I recommended above) has issued a statement on Sen. Biden’s comments here (check out the original since the italics, etc. don’t translate in the copy below):
This is even more morally bankrupt than saying it can be killed because it’s just a blob of cells. Cardinal Egan is exactly right.
The Cardinal is exactly right.
I’m calmer now and it occurs to me that the clear-cut claims of Biden and Pelosi may well serve the purpose of forcing the Catholic bishops to act clearly and forcefully, as they should have done when Ted Kennedy first began to support abortion.
There’s a story that when Gov. Hugh Carey of New York came out as “personally opposed, but…”, his bishop called and privately instructed him to abstain from Communion. He recanted. That’s the sort of quiet instruction Pelosi and Biden should be given by their bishops. If they chose their politics, at least the situation will be more honest.
It’s the sort of instruction that all churches should do.
“No decent religious person thinks fascism is a good idea”.
…so, have no law at all. If you shrink from protecting the unborn why do you suddenly grow a spine to lock someone up for life, give guns to police to defend themselves and the law, and prescribe the necessity of a military?
Sometimes….most times…..ALWAYS…it’s a good idea to defend life.
The VAST majority of the world’s major religions hold remarkably similar ideas about when life begins. To the extent that those religious traditions have been penetrated and corrupted by secular liberal thought you will find “new” ideas about abortion, but very rarely in the classical traditions themselves. Al-Ghazali, the great 12th century Muslim theologian and jurist is absolutely clear that life begins at conception, and the destruction of life after conception is a sin. He recognizes degrees of sin, but he sees abortion of the unborn fetus and infanticide as sin lying along a single continuum. This line about how different religions see things differently is GREATLY exaggerated.
Do we know where he stands on the Death Penalty?
One word:
Weasel.
A quick google indicates that Biden is somewhat of a death penalty supporter which would also put him at odds with his religion. However, it is important to understand that the death penalty issue is very different for Roman Catholics than the abortion issue. There’s SOME room for discussion on the former.
I agree with you all on the above. In addition, the second half of Biden’s answer is incoherent. He’s against fascism, but what that has to do with the matter at hand is unclear. I suppose he may be talking about the Nazi murders of people judged unworthy to continue living. But this diversion avoids the very question he and Obama and Pelosi have been asked: When do people have human rights, and when do they not? When are they people? Looking at this honestly in the context of his faith is too uncomfortable for him, apparently.
Noticed that no one has addressed John316’s comment above. Afraid that just feeds the stereotype about so-called “Pro-Life” people. It’s shocking to me as a Christian that someone could go all militant over a so-called “blob of cells,” but gleefully support the State sponsored murder of another human being.
Biden does not believe it is true, he just “accepts it on faith.” Literally he is saying that he has to privately say it is true, but the fact that other people do not believe it is true is sufficient reason for him not to act on his ‘belief.’ I wonder if he is willing to change some of his other liberal positions because good people who are conservative do not agree with him?
Planonian, being against the death penalty is a respected position among Christians, but not the only possible one. People are executed after having been judged guilty of crimes which the state, in the case of the USA, the elected legislature, has decided are punishable by death. There are certainly precedents in Scripture for the death penalty imposed by the civil authorities for crimes committed. It is not required by Scripture, however, and Christians are free to judge it harsh and inappropriate.
Elective abortion, however, is clearly the killing of an innocent member of the human race growing in the womb. It cannot be condoned and Christian teaching has condemned it since the beginnings of the Church.
[blockquote] If we claim to be Catholic, then American Catholics, including public officials who describe themselves as Catholic, need to act accordingly. – Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., Archbishop of Denver [/blockquote]
It is interesting that with the Catholic church clearly anti-death penalty pro-life, I can’t recall a politician ever being excommunicated for a conservative support of the state sponsored taking of a life.
I wonder if Catholic Bishops will take on Palin, who was baptised Catholic, on the death penalty issue (if it is ever determined what her position is)?
I was fascinated by this quote. [blockquote] I’m prepared as a matter of faith to accept that life begins at the moment of conception. But that is my judgment. For me to impose that judgment on everyone else who is equally and maybe even more devout than I am seems to me is inappropriate in a pluralistic society. [/blockquote]
Yet imposing judgment and enforcing it on unwilling people is precisely what legislation is all about. All legislation is the imposition of someones or some groups values on the rest of us. This is a heck of a stance for a politicion to take.
[blockquote]I can’t recall a politician ever being excommunicated for a conservative support of the state sponsored taking of a life.[/blockquote]
That’s because, according to the Church, capital punishment is not an intrinsic evil. Apples and Oranges
The Catholic Church does not teach that the death penalty is always and everywhere wrong. It DOES teach this about abortion.
Katherine,
Maybe your Bible is different, but the Ten Commandments in mine don’t qualify “Thou shall not kill” with anything about “but only ‘innocent’ life” or “but it’s OK if the State says it is”….
John316, as Palin was apparently not confirmed Catholic and does not claim to be Catholic as an adult, I doubt that the Catholic bishops will have anything to say to her about it.
[blockquote]Maybe your Bible is different, but the Ten Commandments in mine don’t qualify “Thou shall not kill†with anything about “but only ‘innocent’ life†or “but it’s OK if the State says it is . [/blockquote]
Funny, mine says “Thou shalt not murder”
It is my understanding that the Ten Commandments, properly translated, say, “Thou shalt do no murder.” “Murder” is unjustified killing. The Old Testament has discussions of self-defense and instances of executions, and in the New Testament Christians are told to submit to the civil authorities. Total pacifism is a respected Christian tradition but has never been “the one and only” view.
25, take a look at the rest of the OT and you will find quite a number of acts for which the Lord requires the death penalty. You can’t take the 10 Commandments out of context. For example:
Numbers 35:30-33 30 “If anyone kills a person, the murderer shall be put to death on the evidence of witnesses. But no person shall be put to death on the testimony of one witness. 31 Moreover, you shall accept no ransom for the life of a murderer, who is guilty of death, but he shall be put to death. 32 And you shall accept no ransom for him who has fled to his city of refuge, that he may return to dwell in the land before the death of the high priest. 33 You shall not pollute the land in which you live, for blood pollutes the land, and no atonement can be made for the land for the blood that is shed in it, except by the blood of the one who shed it.
I would assume that the prolife folks commenting on this are irrevocably opposed to the American government killing tens of thousands of Iraqis, including old men, women and children who are largely innocent of much of anything.
I would also assume that the commentors here favor the government regulating all sorts of things–such as gun ownership, banks, mortgage companies, financial markets, emissions, insurance companies, utilities, etc. etc. etc.–rather than leaving such matters up to individual choices.
And, yes, I do believe that abortion in most cases is wrong and the killing of innocent humans in the earliest stages of their growth and development. I am less certain that this is the most important issue facing the nation and the world at this particular time.
#30, the Iraqi numbers are grossly inflated, and the vast majority of deaths since the initial invasion, and probably a majority altogether, have been caused by al Qaeda activities. Muslims have killed far more Muslims in the Middle East than Western forces have. And your assumption about government control of everything makes no sense to me.
In any case, whatever estimates one uses for Iraqi casualties, one million plus babies are killed by abortion in the USA every year. The totals are approaching or surpassing the sum of the horrors committed by the Soviets and the Maoists in the century just past. It sounds important to me.
[blockquote]And, yes, I do believe that abortion in most cases is wrong and the killing of innocent humans in the earliest stages of their growth and development.[/blockquote]
Ken, could you tell us in what cases the killing of innocent humans is right?
Thanks everyone, I looked it up and here is what the Catholic Catechism says on Death Penalty:
[blockquote] 2267 The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.
“If, instead, bloodless means are sufficient to defend against the aggressor and to protect the safety of persons, public authority should limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
“Today, in fact, given the means at the State’s disposal to effectively repress crime by rendering inoffensive the one who has committed it, without depriving him definitively of the possibility of redeeming himself, cases of absolute necessity for suppression of the offender ‘today … are very rare, if not practically non-existent.’ [/blockquote]
Okay, okay, okay. I can at least understand how someone just possibly could come up with the idea that the morality of abortion is a matter of opinion in the first couple of weeks. I do not agree, but I can see how someone might ague the point.
But once there are brain waves and a heart beat? How can anyone believe whether or not there is life is a matter of opinion?
And how on earth can anyone vote to stop the beating heart of a child?
Peace,
Pat Kashtock
Take It For What It’s Worth
#31 — Then you think it is O.K. to kill some Iraqi civilians? Or is it your point that since Muslims kill Muslims, it’s O.K. for Christians to kill Muslims? (Incidentally, al Qaeda wasn’t active in Iraq until we got there and destablized the country.) Obviously you want the government to regulate abortions; what else do you think the government should regulate?
#32 — How about in order to save the life of the mother? Or is it your position that an abortion should be forbidden in those cases where carrying the child to term would be fatal to the mother?
al Qaeda was there, but not active against Hussein. Once Hussein was gone, al Qaeda decided to make Iraq their primary battle front. In this, they gambled and lost. In the larger view, I deeply wish that we lived in a world where no force, no police, no punishment, no wars, were ever needed. We don’t. Blog postings here have been over and over and over the decision to remove Hussein after twelve years of cat-and-mouse in which our military were continually being shot at. You disagree with the decision that was taken. Disagreement should not become religious dogma, unless you are a principled pacifist, which is, as I say, a respected but distinctly minority Christian view.
The numbers of abortions which are truly the “hard cases” are less than 5% of the total, and that’s generous. If Roe v. Wade were reversed, I doubt that any states at all would totally ban all abortions. The imminent death of the mother is one case where it likely would be legal everywhere.
According to Katherine, al Qaeda was in Iraq. The actual evidence is that they were there until [b]Hussein[/b] kicked them out. They returned [b]after[/b] we invaded Iraq and failed to deal with the political chaos we helped bring about. Upon returning, al Qaeda helped run the [b]American[/b] death toll to more than 9/11.
Chris asked “in what cases the killing of innocent humans is right.” I answered. Katherine suggests “imminent death of the mother is one case where it likely would be legal everywhere,” which I would gather means that it would be a political matter settled by politicians from place to place in differing ways.
Ther reality is that abortion is generally legal in the United States and is likely to remain so regardless of whether Biden or Palin is elected president.
Where there may be a difference is the willingness of the new President to provide affordable prenatal, natal and postnatal care for pregnant women and their children, to provide affordable child care, to eliminate discrimination against women in the workplace and to make adoption easier, so that women do not find themselves in the position of having to choose abortion. And once the child is born, to provide good early childhood, elementary and secondary education and affordable college education, so that child has equal opportunity for success and to become a valued person in our society.
[blockquote]#32—How about in order to save the life of the mother? Or is it your position that an abortion should be forbidden in those cases where carrying the child to term would be fatal to the mother? [/blockquote]
Fair enough. I don’t agree, but I think it’d be impossible to pass any sort of abortion ban in the US without a ‘life of the mother’ clause (note I said LIFE not HEALTH, which has become a mere cop-out).
The only thing worse than an idiot is an arrogant idiot.
This is like saying, “Well, I don’t believe in murder, but if Ted Bundy has a different viewpoint than me, that’s ok, too”.