Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

To Give a Defense

Home
Catholic
In Election, Protecting Conscience as Important as Ending Abortion

In Election, Protecting Conscience as Important as Ending Abortion

Last updated on: March 11, 2018 at 2:56 pm by Scott Eric Alt

In Election, Protecting Conscience as Important as Ending Abortion 2018-03-11T14:56:53-04:00 Scott Eric Alt

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Frederic Sorrieu, “Universal Suffrage.”

In reference to my post yesterday, a reader writes (with my emphases):

In my opinion, a better question is whether abortion is really the end-all election issue many conservative Catholics make it out to be. What if there were an issue as important as abortion that Catholics need to consider? I think there is. And I think it is conscience rights.

Since at least 2009, when the debate surrounding the Affordable Care Act was swirling, I have been appalled by how conservative Catholics, especially clergy (including bishops), have been trying to manipulate the consciences of American Catholics by telling them they cannot vote for Democrats, even pro-life Democrats, under pain of mortal sin. This became even worse in 2012 with Obama’s re-election campaign, and is at a fever pitch now.

Here is what Gaudium et Spes says:

Furthermore, whatever is opposed to life itself, such as any type of murder, genocide, abortion, euthanasia or willful self-destruction, whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, torments inflicted on body or mind, attempts to coerce the will itself; whatever insults human dignity, such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution, the selling of women and children; as well as disgraceful working conditions, where men are treated as mere tools for profit, rather than as free and responsible persons; all these things and others of their like are infamies indeed. They poison human society, but they do more harm to those who practice them than those who suffer from the injury. Moreover, they are supreme dishonor to the Creator (GS 27).

Here, in this document from Vatican II, the Council Fathers equate abortion and “attempts to coerce the will itself” as “infamies.” They are listed together as grave offenses against the Creator (which I think was a title for God chosen deliberately here to recognize the human person, in his totality, as the apex of God’s creative work).

I believe a Catholic could, in good conscience, choose to abstain from voting in this election or vote for a third-party candidate. But I will vote for Hillary Clinton for two major reasons:

One, to make the most emphatic statement I can in rejection of Donald Trump by voting for the person with the best chance to defeat him. Two, and even more importantly, to take a stand for conscience rights against the conservative Catholic clergy and laity who are attempting to frighten Catholics away from voting for Clinton by telling them (falsely) that those Catholics who vote for Clinton will go to hell if they do. I did that in 2012 [by voting for Obama], and I will continue to do it at least until priests and bishops stop doing this and repudiate having ever done so, once and for all.

And the problem is not just that some try to manipulate and frighten Catholics away from voting for Mrs. Clinton. Many also will try to manipulate and frighten you away from not voting for Mr. Trump—even if you say you will vote third party, or stay home.

In my own case, several people have hijacked discussions on my Facebook wall in order to write long and graphic descriptions of what happens during an abortion. Or to say that sixty million dead babies are pleading with us to vote for Mr. Trump.

Yesterday, someone tweeted to me a graphic picture of a bloody and dismembered baby as the kind of thing I would be responsible for—not if I vote for Mrs. Clinton, but merely if I refuse to vote for Mr. Trump.

This is emotional manipulation. It is the tactic, not of thinkers, but of bullies.

And so my reader is exactly right to take this stand for conscience.

Because—and this is what I was trying to point out through the challenge in my prior post—when it comes to Trump vs. Clinton, no one has any reason to believe that Mr. Trump will be any better on the abortion issue. All you can do is appeal to your unthinking faith in what Mr. Trump has “promised.” Trump said it, I believe it, that settles it.

But where is the actual evidence that Mr. Trump’s “conversion” to the pro-life cause is actually in earnest, and not just an election year play to the conservative base? No such evidence exists.

But Trump said it, I believe it, that settles it.

Do you really mean to tell me that Mr. Trump has been so scrupulously honest in all things, that we can take him at his word when he speaks of his pro-life sentiments? or when he promises to appoint pro-life judges to the Supreme Court?

Really?

But Trump said it, I believe it, that settles it.

In fact, in Mr. Trump’s case, there is good reason not to put faith in his pro-life “conversion.” He claims to have become pro-life because of the child of friends who decided to keep him rather than abort him, as they had originally intended. And the child, said Mr. Trump, turned out to be a “superstar.”

But what if the child had not been a “superstar”? What if he’d turned out to be a “loser,” or what if he had been born with Down’s Syndrome?

In fact, Mr. Trump was asked that very thing. Here is his answer.

I’ve never thought of it. That’s an interesting question. I’ve never thought of it. Probably not, but I’ve never thought of it. I would say no, but in this case it was an easy one because he’s such an outstanding person.

Don’t lie to yourself: Mr. Trump is not pro-life; he is pro-“superstar.”

But Trump said it, I believe it, that settles it.

So where does that leave us? That leaves us in an election where abortion is a non-issue. And that is where my reader’s appeal to conscience comes in, and is exactly right.

Attempting to emotionally manipulate Catholic voters into voting for Mr. Trump (because abortion) is an evil as great as abortion itself, because—as the Church tells us in Gaudium et Spes—one’s conscience is an integral part of his very life.

I find it ironic that the very people who are so insistent upon the primacy of prudential judgment on issues like waterboarding, or the death penalty, or immigration, suddenly act as though decisions about voting are not areas of prudential judgment. Somehow abortion is the only issue that matters in these cases. And even when there is no evidence that Trump actually means it when he claims to be pro-life, we are supposed to accept his word as though it were His Word.

Trump said it, I believe it, that settles it.

But voting is always a complex and individual moral calculus, involving a great many questions apart from abortion. And so Cardinal Ratzinger says That it is licit to vote for a pro-abortion candidate so long as you do not do so because the candidate is pro-abortion. Your vote must be justified by an effort to avoid “proportionate” evils.

How about these for proportionate evils? Donald Trump:

is endorsed by Kim Jong-Un, Vladimir Putin, Islamic terrorists, Neo-Nazi terrorists, the KKK, the Chinese Communist Party, Serbian war criminal Vojislav Seselj, Russian Fascist Aleksandr Dugin, and convicted murderer Don King
praises Saddam Hussein, tweets Mussolini quotes, uses pictures of Nazi soliders in his campaign material.
pledges to use libel laws against dissenting journalists, in violation of the first amendment
refuses to condemn violence engaged in by his supporters, promising to pay their legal fees, and once claimed he could murder someone on Fifth Avenue and not lose any support
calls for the execution of Edward Snowden
calls for war crimes by advocating the killing of terrorists’ families
promises to do “unthinkable” things in response to terrorism
speaks out against the Geneva Conventions as a hindrance
threatens to shoot down Russian planes
wonders why we just can’t use our nukes
calls for global nuclear rearmament
says the Chinese government “showed strength” by cracking down on the protesters in Tiennamen Square
promises to seize oil fields in the Middle East
says he wants to invade Syria with 30,000 soldiers
promises a return to more brutal forms of execution than lethal injection
asks Russia to commit espionage against the United States

And on and on and on. But you can check out the link above, which includes documentation of these and every other charge against Mr. Trump.

In this election, mr. Trump’s pro-life credentials are in enough doubt that there is no chance I would ever overlook everything else. “Trump said it, I believe it, that settles it” does not persuade me. I will not vote for Mrs. Clinton—I have always said that I will vote third party—but a Catholic (like my reader above) who decides that he or she must vote for Mrs. Clinton in order to stop Mr. Trump is acting with a Catholic conscience as fully-formed as anyone else’s, and is absolutely right to protest against the emotional bullying and manipulation that other Catholics, including clergy, engage in.

“Vote for Trump or the babies will die” is not a way to win people to your way of thinking. Especially when it’s not true.

***

Previous Post

August 15, 2016

Here's Your Chance to Convince Me to Vote Trump

Next Post

August 22, 2016 On the Seamless Garment, and Catholics Writing About Politics

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Abortion About Me Answers for Calvinists Answers to Media Fictions Answers to Objections Anti-Catholicism Apologetics Apostolic Succession Atonement Authority of the Church Baptism Benedictines Biblical Exegesis Blogging Book Reviews Books & Writing &c. Calvin's Institutes Capital Punishment Catholic Church Chastity Christology Church Fathers Church Social Doctrine Confession Contraception Conversion Stories Crusades Debates Depression & Suicide Deuterocanon Development of Doctrine Ecumenism English Language Eucharistic Adoration Exorcism Extra Ecclesiam Fisks & Rebuttals Freedom of Religion Freedom of Speech Fundamentalism Gender Politics Gender Theory Good Works Homosexuality Humor Idolatry Immaculate Conception In the News Inquisition ISIS Islam Just for Fun Just War Justification LCWR Limbo Liturgical Abuse Liturgical Year Magisterium Marriage and Family Mary Mortal Sin New Evangelization NFP Papacy Papal Documents Papal Infallibility Personal Narrative Politics Pope Francis Pope Francis Derangement Syndrome Population Control Praying to the "Dead" Priesthood Primacy of Peter Protestant Denominations Purgatory Radical Islam Radical Traditionalists Real Presence Right to Conscience RIght to Life Saints Same-Sex "Marriage" Seven Quick Takes Social Justice Social Media Sola Scriptura Spirit of Vatican II SSPX The Eucharist The Mass The Resurrection Traditionalism Vatican II Year of Mercy

Select a Month August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 November 2018 October 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 April 2018 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 May 2013 April 2013 February 2013 January 2013

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What Christian tradition refers to its pastors as "elders"?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Catholic Presbyterian Orthodox Anglican