Issues Page

The every-four-year national skirmish among Catholics over abortion politics is as predictable as a politician's smile. But this year a few "game changers," in the phrase of the season, have altered the conversation within the Catholic community and for the wider culture. For the first time since the abortion issue began to dominate the Catholic political discussion 35 years ago, groups have organized and high-profile Catholics have gone public to insist that Catholic teaching does not prohibit a vote for a pro-choice politician. Much to the contrary, in fact, groups like Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good and Catholics United note that the teaching explicitly prohibits bishops from endorsing or opposing specific candidates, from instructing Catholics on how to vote or from arguing that Catholics need consider only one issue in determining how to vote.

Whatever happened to the death penalty as a moral priority for Catholics in the US presidential election? Why don't they challenge their candidates on the issue? It's not as if the Church is ambiguous any more. There goes the president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Cardinal Renato Martino, in Rome today, looking to the day in which the death penalty is "definitively eliminated" from the earth. He was speaking at a conference in Rome organised by the Catholic community of Sant'Egidio, which has spearheaded the international campaign to abolish the death penalty. Cardinal Martino left American Catholics no wiggle room in his description of the death penalty as "contrary to the great Christian values which sustain the universal rights of man." It may not be as absolutely definitive as abortion and euthanasia, but the Church's opposition to capital punishment (except when faced with the breakdown of civil order) remains one of the core elements of its pro-life teaching.

With the presidential election just 40 days away, many Roman Catholic bishops and parish leaders are working aggressively to highlight the church's opposition to abortion. In Chicago, the archdiocese's Respect Life office and five other anti-abortion groups are holding a round-the clock prayer vigil for the next 40 days outside a medical clinic on the city's North Side that performs abortions. On Wednesday, the first night of the vigil outside Family Planning Associates, more than 100 people gathered, many holding white candles and rosary beads, staring at the clinic as they prayed. No mention was made of either Sens. John McCain or Barack Obama, but apprehension about the election was in the night air.

Abortion has been one of the most divisive and polarizing issues in American politics for the past 35 years. Despite the extensive public debate, people's views are not changing. Opinions on abortion have remained relatively stable since 1995 according to a recent report from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. Support for keeping abortion legal in all or most cases has fluctuated between 49% and 61% while support for making abortion illegal in all or most cases has fluctuated between 36% and 48%. Currently the numbers are 54% for keeping it legal; 41% for making it illegal. Neither side is convincing the other. Opponents of abortion argue that morality is not based on public opinion. That is true, but law is often based on public opinion. Certainly laws cannot be enforced without the support of public opinion. The inability of the United States successfully to enforce laws against illegal immigration, drugs, prostitution and gambling shows how difficult it is to enforce laws that significant numbers of citizens, even a significant minority, do not support.

Though the American banking crisis and the effect it will have on the presidential campaign grabbed the media's attention this week, abortion has remained a flashpoint in Catholic circles. Much of the focus has been on Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, the Democratic vice presidential candidate, who says he is a Catholic who believes pro-life teachings but that it's "inappropriate in a pluralistic society" to impose his views, given that Roe v. Wade established protections for women seeking abortion. Bishop Francis Malooly, the new bishop of the Diocese of Wilmington, said in a statement Sept. 10 he intends to "build a supportive and trusting friendship" with Biden and other leaders to help them "understand how crucial the sanctity of human life is to a just society."

Abortion rates have dropped steadily since the 1980s, from a peak of 29.3 abortions per 1,000 women in 1981 to 19.4 in 2005. But behind this general decrease are striking changes in the demographics of abortion. Compared to 30 years ago, women having abortions today are older and more likely to be mothers and minorities, according to a study released Tuesday by the nonprofit, nonpartisan Guttmacher Institute. The study looked at trends in abortion since 1974, the year after the Supreme Court passed Roe v. Wade, legalizing abortion in the United States. What researchers found is contrary to what pop culture phenoms, from "Juno" to Jamie Lynn Spears, might suggest: Teenagers are not the most likely to confront this issue, twenty-somethings are.

Abortions in the United States fell 33 percent between 1974 and 2004, but sizeable differences among racial and economic groups continue to exist as to who gets an abortion, a new report says. While the number of abortions among teens has also dropped dramatically, down 50 percent, abortion rates are still high among older women with children and poor women, according to the report from the Guttmacher Institute. Most U.S. women having abortions today come from lower income groups, she said. The rate of abortions in the United States has dropped 33 percent from 1974 to 2004. In 1980 there were 29 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44; by 2004, that number had dropped to 20 per 1,000 women, according to the report.

In the midst of a lengthy political campaign, matters of public policy that are also moral issues sometimes are misrepresented or are presented in a partial or manipulative fashion. While everyone could be expected to know the Church's position on the immorality of abortion and the role of law in protecting unborn children, it seems some profess not to know it and others, even in the Church, dispute it. Since this teaching has recently been falsely presented, the following clarification may be helpful. The Catholic Church, from its first days, condemned the aborting of unborn children as gravely sinful. Not only Scripture's teaching about God's protection of life in the womb (consider the prophets and the psalms and the Gospel stories about John the Baptist and Jesus himself in Mary's womb) but also the first century catechism (the Didache or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles) said: "You shall not slay the child by abortions. You shall not kill what is generated."

f the 2008 campaign has established one indisputable fact, it is that Nancy Pelosi is no St. Augustine. Nor is Joe Biden another Thomas Aquinas. The two Democrats -- and Roman Catholics -- invoked both those church heavyweights recently on separate "Meet the Press" appearances, responding to a question from Tom Brokaw as to when life begins and what that means to their support for abortion rights. The so-called communion wars -- the quadrennial intramural Catholic feud over who is in a state of grace -- had broken out yet again. Mrs. Pelosi's misstep jarred the start of the Democratic convention, and Mr. Biden's comments came just as John McCain's surprise pick for running mate, Sarah Palin, was wowing fellow evangelicals with her pro-life persona. By week's end, the usual storyline was playing out -- secular pro-choice Democrats versus godly pro-life Republicans, with millions of unborn lives in the balance.

In books and speeches, I have often said that God is neither a Democrat nor a Republican. I have contended that to make either party "The God Party" is idolatry. This, however, does not mean that Christians should abandon political activism. It has been said that all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing. Consequently, I have long called for Christians to be involved in both political parties, striving to be the "leaven" that permeates both parties with biblically-based judgments and values derived from Christian beliefs.

More government assistance for poor women can significantly reduce abortion rates, according to a new study from Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good. The social justice advocacy group says that with the right economic incentives more women will choose life. "It's common sense that more assistance will reduce the number of abortions," said Alexia Kelley, the group's executive director. But some pro-life groups are skeptical. Brian Harris of Tennessee Right to Life says that he supports increased aid for poor women, along with legal restrictions for abortion.

A struggle within the church over how Catholic voters should think about abortion is once again flaring up just as political partisans prepare an all-out battle for the votes of Mass-going Catholics in swing-state towns like Scranton. The theological dispute is playing out in diocesan newspapers and weekly homilies, while the campaigns scramble to set up phone banks of nuns and private meetings with influential bishops. Progressive Catholics complain that by wading into the history of church opposition to abortion - Mr. Biden brought up St. Thomas Aquinas, Ms. Pelosi discussed St. Augustine - Democratic officials are starting a distracting debate with the church hierarchy.

The U.S. bishops' administrative committee announced Sept. 10 the bishops’ conference will take up the enduring and vexing issue of politics and abortion in America when it meets in Baltimore next November. The meeting, which will come one week after the national elections, will take place with an urgency generated by a series of critical statements bishops have made in recent days of major Democratic Party political figures. The announcement came as the committee, headed by Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, added its weight to statements made by Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia and Bishop William E. Lori of Bridgeport, Conn., chairmen of the U.S. bishops' pro-life and doctrine committees. The bishops took on Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Party vice-presidential candidate, Senator Joseph Biden, for remarks they have made about abortion.

First abortion, now embryonic stem-cell research. An issue that energizes social conservatives has once again been thrust into the presidential campaign, after Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., the Democratic nominee for vice president, attacked Republicans on Tuesday for rejecting President Bush's limited support for using human embryonic cell lines to develop medical therapies. The Republican Party platform, just adopted in St. Paul, opposes any form of human embryonic stem-cell research. The McCain campaign, however, immediately cried foul, accusing Mr. Biden of "offensive" behavior and implying that the attack was directed at Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, the Republican vice-presidential nominee, who in April gave birth to a son with Down syndrome and has promised parents of children with disabilities that she will be "a friend and advocate in the White House" if elected.

When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi meets with San Francisco Archbishop George Niederauer to discuss Catholic teaching on abortion, at least two paths could emerge. The strongly pro-choice Catholic politician might vigorously debate Augustine and church history with her archbishop. Or the two will try to put their heads together to create a public resolution that is acceptable for everyone. Or maybe they will do both. But two Catholic scholars who know about butting heads with the church agree on this: The controversy that brought this meeting about could have been avoided. "I think it's a mistake for politicians to talk theology," said Jesuit Father Thomas J. Reese, senior research fellow at Woodstock Theological Center. "Let's just say, it's above their pay grade."

The Roman Catholic Church in Chicago, and indeed the world, is blessed by the thoughtful teaching of Cardinal Francis George. It gives me special joy to say that years ago his mother and my grandmother were over-the-fence neighbors in St. Pascal's Parish. Truth be told, I heard more than once in my childhood, "Why can't you be like the 'saintly Francis George'?" But let's not go there. For the last several months, conservative bloggers have been lampooning me for endorsing Sen. Barack Obama for president - admittedly, a somewhat unusual thing for a Republican to do-so some political paddling is fair. What is unfair has been those Republican partisans who have tried to close the door on Obama in the name of the Catholic faith.

Father Kavanaugh's purpose in writing Senator Obama was to alert him to what he called "his abortion problem." Having raised this topic with the senator myself in person, and having made it my principal reservation in giving him my public endorsement, I concur. In fact, Father Kavanaugh thoughtfully noted that my endorsement-which I would give again-has nevertheless come at a considerable cost for me: the loss of collegial friendships from the Reagan and Bush administrations; harsh, even brutal, blog commentary that embarrasses my family and myself; and even the denial of communion by a zealous prelate. Why endure all that? Because Senator Obama is not only ready to lead, he is leading. He inspires America and foreign nations alike with his integrity, intelligence, and call for change to meet great needs precipitated by unjustified war, corporate profiteering and a self-centered autonomy that aggravates, rather than elevates, the human condition.

When Douglas W. Kmiec endorsed Senator Barack Obama for president last spring, it made waves, especially among Roman Catholics. A constitutional scholar who headed the Office of Legal Counsel under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush, Mr. Kmiec was well known as an articulate opponent of abortion. He says, "consider the choices: A Catholic can either continue on the failed and uncertain path of seeking to overturn Roe, which would result in the individual states doing their own thing, not necessarily, or in most states even likely, protective of the unborn. Or Senator Obama's approach could be followed, whereby prenatal and income support, paid maternity leave and greater access to adoption would be relied upon to reduce the incidence of abortion."

Sen. John McCain's pick for his vice-presidential running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, drew loud cheers from opponents of legal abortion -- and sent the left scurrying into strategy meetings. Polls consistently show that abortion ranks far down on the issues most important to voters. One nonprofit that advocates for working-class women, 9to5, said its members are most concerned with getting paid sick days and achieving pay parity with men -- issues that Sen. Hillary Clinton ran on and Sen. Barack Obama stressed, to rousing cheers, during his speech this week accepting the Democratic nomination. Abortion-rights groups, however, think choice is a winning issue for them. They intend to hammer home the abortion issue in an intense outreach to independent and Republican women -- with a special attention on suburban women in key swing states.

Voters should judge U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, on the whole of his record and political vision rather than concentrating on one topic such as abortion, said U.S. Sen. Bob Casey Jr., D-Pa. "I don't make a determination on how to vote for them or support them based upon one issue, even on a very important issue like abortion. That's the approach I take, and that's the approach I ask voters to take of me." Casey ran as a pro-life Democrat during his successful senatorial campaign in 2006. In a speech to the Democratic National Convention at Pepsi Center Aug. 26, Casey shared advice his legendary father, the late Pennsylvania Gov. Bob Casey, would give regarding using power to help people.