Pro-obama Catholic

[melporcristo]

Washington DC, Oct 19, 2008 / 02:00 pm (CNA).- Ms. Cathleen Kaveny, one of the three high profile self-described pro-life Catholics who supports Sen. Barack Obama for president, has made the case in an article published by the Jesuit weekly magazine “America,” that abortion is indeed an intrinsic evil, but that it is still okay to vote for pro-abortion candidates, since “intrinsic evil,” may not be “grave” enough.

Kaveny, a Professor of Law and Theology at the University of Notre Dame, has joined professors Douglas W. Kmiec and Nicholas P. Cafardi in trying to make a Catholic case for Sen. Barack Obama despite his 100% pro-abortion record.

In “Intrinsic Evil and Political Responsibility,” a long article published in America magazine’s October 27 edition, Kaveny asks, “Is the concept of intrinsic evil helpful to the Catholic voter?”

The Notre Dame professor’s answer, after a long and convoluted argument, comes in the last sentence: “the language of intrinsic evil does not help us here. Only the virtue of practical wisdom, enlightened by charity, can take us further.”

Kaveny admits that the term “intrinsic evil” is used “not only in such documents as Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, the 2008 document for Catholics issued by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, but also in political skirmishes among American Catholics.” “The term ‘intrinsic evil’ seems to connote great and contaminating evil—evil that we take inside ourselves simply by associating with it. The term itself suggests that ‘intrinsic evil’ involves wrongdoing of an entirely different magnitude than ordinary, run-of-the-mill wrongdoing. Consequently, intrinsic evils must pose great moral dangers to both individuals and society at large, and these dangers ought to dwarf all other considerations in casting one’s vote,” explains the Notre Dame professor.

Quoting Pope John Paul’s encyclical “The Splendor of Truth”, the Catechism of the Catholic Church and Thomas Aquinas, Kaveny proposes that “ ‘intrinsically evil’ does not mean ‘gravely evil’,” since “intrinsically evil acts are acts that are wrong by reason of their object, not by reason of their motive or their circumstance.”

“Furthermore,” she adds, “not all intrinsically evil acts involve a significant violation of justice, the precondition for making an act illegal. No serious candidate for national office maintains that masturbation, homosexual acts or contraception should be outlawed in the United States today; and most Catholic legal theorists, whether conservative or liberal, would agree with them.”

“Some commentators,” Kaveny writes, “have suggested that voters ought to prioritize opposition to gay marriage and abortion because third parties have an overriding duty to prevent intrinsically evil acts and to protect their potential victims.”

“But this argument is incorrect,” she claims. “It is not always most important for third parties to intervene to prevent harm caused by intrinsically evil acts. Sometimes preventing harm caused by other kinds of wrongdoing, or even harm caused by natural disasters, can take priority.”

Trying to make the case for why devout Catholics should vote for Obama, she also argues that “in this fallen world, moral character alone is not enough. Political competence and other practical skills are also required. The person with the best moral character may not be the best president.”

“Finally,” Kaveny points out, “the defender might admit that there is one issue of overriding importance for which the term ‘intrinsic evil’ is useful in political considerations: abortion.”

But the professor argues that the application of this moral term “has moved far beyond the technical use normally employed in Catholic action theory: it is evocative, not analytical.”

And therefore it would be licit, she says, even necessary for a Catholic to consider other “infamies” at the same moral level of abortion and euthanasia, such as “disgraceful working conditions, where men are treated as mere tools for profit, rather than as free and responsible persons.”

In conclusion, speaking about herself, professor Kaveny says that “for many pro-life Catholics, the issue of voting and abortion comes down to this: what does one do if one thinks that the candidate more likely to reduce the actual incidence of abortion is also the one more committed to keeping it legal?”

Kaveny delivers her answer in an article published on Newsweek´s web site and penned in conjunction with professors Kmiec and Cafardi in response to an article by George Weigel.

“Is Obama the perfect pro-life candidate?” the professors ask. “No. Is he preferable to the self-proclaimed ‘pro-lifer’ McCain? Yes, because promoting life in actuality beats McCain's label and all of Weigel's elegant theorizing and hand-wringing. The Republican alternative familiar to Weigel is simultaneously self-righteous, easy and ineffective. The Democratic path is practical, anything but easy—as no act of bona fide love of neighbor ever is— but inviting of a life-affirming outcome.”

[Apotheoun]

She is quite simply mistaken. Murder is always gravely immoral.

[eagle_eye222001]

I like the point of how "'intrinsic evil,' may not be 'grave' enough."

Does intrinsic evil mean it is gravely evil? This is new thought to me.

To think that Obama's plans are realistic is another note to think of though. Will the upper class magically pick up the extra weight Obama brings?

I think not.

Palin 2012

[FSM Sister]

We heard all these supposedly social arguments when Roe vs Wade was being passed. We heard the lies that legalizing abortion would save more lives than it would cost, because it would end the cycle of poverty, save women from losing their lives in back alley abortions, save children from being condemned to a life of child abuse, and that it was compassionate for children who would be born with birth defect.

Lies, all lies.

What was the result?

Increased number of pregnancies, more poverty, same level of child abuse - even more in some areas, more sexual promiscuity, millions of life lost through AIDS because of the increased sexual promiscuity, higher rates of teen pregnancy (because what the heck? If I get pregnant, I can always have an abortion), a fast shift in the homosexual agenda, and all the other evils that go along with this culture of death that the last three Holy Fathers have warned us against.

Do you not get the message yet?

Stop lying to yourselves by trying to placate your conscience with all your convaluted arguments that there are other evils in the world. Infanticide is the root evil - Mother Teresa looked Clinton in the eye and said America needs to stop murdering its own children.

We can either vote to turn this country around morally, or continue down the path of greed by thinking a ficticious tax cut for 95% is going to work some kind of miracle.

Barrack Obama is evil - plain and simple. Don't let his calm demeanor, slick speeches, and charismatic personality fool you.

[rkwright]

Whats the response to these specific paragraphs?

[quote]“Furthermore,” she adds, “not all intrinsically evil acts involve a significant violation of justice, the precondition for making an act illegal. No serious candidate for national office maintains that masturbation, homosexual acts or contraception should be outlawed in the United States today; and most Catholic legal theorists, whether conservative or liberal, would agree with them.”

“Some commentators,” Kaveny writes, “have suggested that voters ought to prioritize opposition to gay marriage and abortion because third parties have an overriding duty to prevent intrinsically evil acts and to protect their potential victims.”

“But this argument is incorrect,” she claims. “It is not always most important for third parties to intervene to prevent harm caused by intrinsically evil acts. Sometimes preventing harm caused by other kinds of wrongdoing, or even harm caused by natural disasters, can take priority.”[/quote]

To the first one, I would say while not all intrinsically evil acts involve a violation of justice, abortion does in the same way murder does. Anyone would be opposed to murder, and thats exactly what abortion is.

To her second and third paragraphs. This seems to be avoiding the issue by dreaming of more dangerous scenarios. Sure, if the world is on the brink of destruction maybe we have something more overriding than abortion. But right now we have a tangible problem to fix.

I really think she is making too much of this intrinsic evil stuff. We move to outlaw abortion because it is murder, and because its murder its intrinsically evil. Intrinsically evil things that need to be outlawed is a subset of intrinsically evil things.

I dunno what do you think...

[Majella]

I would say that the babies consider abortion "intrinsically evil" and "grave"!
She shouldn't call herself a Catholic and a pro-lifer.

[Saint Therese]

God have mercy on us all.

[Akalyte]

I know catholics who say"Obama's the anti-christ, but he's the lesser of 2 evils". lol
liberalism really is a mental disorder.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='melporcristo' post='1681647' date='Oct 19 2008, 09:36 PM']Washington DC, Oct 19, 2008 / 02:00 pm (CNA).- Ms. Cathleen Kaveny, one of the three high profile self-described pro-life Catholics who supports Sen. Barack Obama for president, has made the case in an article published by the Jesuit weekly magazine “America,” that abortion is indeed an intrinsic evil, but that it is still okay to vote for pro-abortion candidates, since “intrinsic evil,” may not be “grave” enough.[/quote]
+J.M.J.+
since when is ripping a child out of the womb, puncturing its skull with scissors and sucking its brains out not "grave"? because if Obama is president, he will overturn the ban on this horrific 'procedure'.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1681889' date='Oct 20 2008, 11:32 AM']+J.M.J.+
since when is ripping a child out of the womb, puncturing its skull with scissors and sucking its brains out not "grave"? because if Obama is president, he will overturn the ban on this horrific 'procedure'.[/quote]

Obama says he's opposed to late term abortions.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Akalyte' post='1681828' date='Oct 20 2008, 04:40 AM']I know catholics who say"Obama's the anti-christ, but he's the lesser of 2 evils". lol
liberalism really is a mental disorder.[/quote]

Wow, how ironic. Someone who takes Savage seriously thinking they are fit to diagnose anyone with a "mental disorder"

[socalscout]

I will apply my "A few good men" Logic to this.

Petersen: Grave Intrinsic Evil?
Jessep: Is there another kind? ...

[Didymus]

[quote name='Akalyte' post='1681828' date='Oct 20 2008, 05:40 AM']liberalism really is a mental disorder.[/quote]

as a somewhat liberal yet strongly pro-life Catholic, should I take offense?

Obama is far from pro-life. Even if the abortion issue didn't exist, Obama would be no better than McCain on life issues. He doesn't even oppose the war in Iraq for life-related reasons.

[Spamity Calamity]

[quote name='melporcristo' post='1681647' date='Oct 19 2008, 11:36 PM']Washington DC, Oct 19, 2008 / 02:00 pm (CNA).- Ms. Cathleen Kaveny, one of the three high profile self-described pro-life Catholics who supports Sen. Barack Obama for president, has made the case in an article published by the Jesuit weekly magazine “America,” that [b]abortion is indeed an intrinsic evil, but that it is still okay to vote for pro-abortion candidates, since “intrinsic evil,” may not be “grave” enough.[/b][/quote]

Hmmm I think I found the point where the argument fails.

[Akalyte]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1681917' date='Oct 20 2008, 01:17 PM']Wow, how ironic. Someone who takes Savage seriously thinking they are fit to diagnose anyone with a "mental disorder"[/quote]

Liberals vote for disorder and expect satisfaction and order. Just look at the liberal democrat platform. It's true. Half of the liberals I know they dont study, they dont even pay attention to the other sides position, they just say"democrats for the poor, republicans for the rich" and stick with that. Putting social and monetary issues above human life, the Idolatry the church warns about the most.