September 6, 2012 / MariaNews.com 

Guest Opinion: Guidance for the Informed Catholic Voter and A Look at the Party Platforms

By Dr. Frederick Liewehr

RICHMOND, VA. (Catholic Online) – “The best defense of democracy is an informed electorate.” “Voting is the least arduous of a citizen’s duties. He has the prior and harder duty of making up his mind.” These quotations, attributed to Thomas Jefferson and Ralph Barton Perry respectively, imply that if we are to have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, then that people must do its share by becoming conversant with the issues, the candidates, and their platforms before every election. Only if the voters are informed – and truly understand the gravity of their responsibility to participate in the direction that their country takes – can we become a responsible people and nation.

 

In the 21st Century, like it or not, we face a government that now spends over 25% of our GDP, the highest at any time in history except for WWII. Additionally, Federal regulatory agencies are involved in all facets of life, so that you cannot even use a shower, the toilet, or now even a light bulb without feeling the weight of Federal control. When the government has become that pervasive, citizens must assume responsibility, while they still can, for its direction. Thus, it is imperative that voters understand what the candidates for office consider to be the role of government, and how they propose to bring that vision to reality.

During the 2008 Presidential election, we heard a lot about “change”, but few understood what exactly was going to be changed, or how. We were asked, with the so-called “health care” legislation, to approve a huge document with ramifications for one sixth of our economy without reading it; in the infamous words of Nancy Pelosi, “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it – away from the fog of the controversy.” This is hardly what Jefferson had in mind.

The Democratic Party Platform makes it very clear. “This election is not simply a choice between two candidates or two political parties, but between two fundamentally different paths for our country and our families.” That is an understatement, and highlights why it is so critical that we pay especially close attention to the parties’ platforms in this election.

There is no doubt that America has seen “change” over the past fifty years, particularly on the social front. “Conservatives”, usually Republicans, seek to minimize these changes, and generally think that the traditional interpretation of the Constitution, what it says, it means, is correct. “Progressives”, usually Democrats, believe in a “living Constitution” where what it says is up to a judge, a court, or even popular opinion to determine. These two groups have had increasingly divergent views on social issues, and the voter must decide on which side he or she resides, to stand up and be counted. This is not optional. Ayn Rand, though understandably controversial for many of her positions, correctly observed that man “has the power to choose, but no power to escape the necessity of choice.”

But how do we choose? Like the fruit in the Garden, so many things “seem” good. In what has been labeled the “culture war” the only guidance that matters comes from Christ’s Church. We have all seen what happens when secular humanism and the hope of creating heaven on earth collide with the realities of Original Sin and disobedience to God’s commands. The paramount rule for any citizen must be “Refuse the evil, and choose the good. [Isaiah 7:15]” No matter how appealing the proposal may be, the ends never justify the means. The most elementary form of this commandment regards the sanctity of life, without which nothing else we do can be sanctified. Again, God puts this very simply: “I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: Therefore choose life. [Deuteronomy 30:19]”

The easiest way the prospective voter has to evaluate the plans of the two parties and their candidates is to examine the party platforms. Obviously each candidate is an individual in hisor her own right, and cannot expect to support the party platform at all times and in all ways, but the platforms are constructed so as to convey at least in generalities how the candidates will govern. Additionally, the candidates are constrained by existing law, so, for example a Republican candidate may not feel they can say say that heor she will immediately put an end to abortion because it is already enshrined in law by the Supreme Court.

He can, however, indicate whether or not he supports reduction or expansion of that law within his powers. Naturally, you cannot expect someone who intends to, say, deprive you of your civil liberties to tell you that is his intention. You must read the “code language” and consider his previous record, and realize that he may simply not mention it if he considers it too problematical for too many people. Better to let them find out after the election.

With that in mind, I would encourage you to read the entire platform of each party before you vote. The Republican Platform can be found here  and the Democratic Party Platform can be found here Consider carefully what the party has done in the past and what it says it will do in the future. You should also read the US catholic Bishops’ “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship“ the EWTN guide and Catholic Answers’ “Voters Guide for Serious Catholics”

In the Catholic Answers’ guide are listed five non-negotiable, intrinsically evil actions that must never be promoted by the law. Regrettably some are already enshrined in law in this country, so these must be reversed and countered, not supported, by any prospective candidate. To that end, I will briefly digest the statements contained in the two platforms concerning those actions to help you begin your research. In a few places I have added explanatory comments. You may research other issues, such as religious freedom, for yourselves.

1. Abortion

Democrat Party Platform: “. in his first month in office, President Obama overturned the’global gag rule’, a ban on federal funds to foreign family planning organizations that provided information about, counseling on, or offered abortions. And that is why the administration has supported lifesaving family planning health information and services.” (The “health information and services” are generally provided by Planned Parenthood). “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay.”

Republican Party Platform: “We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion or fund organizations which perform or advocate it and will not fund or subsidize health care which includes abortion coverage.  We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life.”

2. Euthanasia

Democratic Party Platform: Not mentioned

Republican Party Platform: “We oppose the non-consensual  withholding  or  withdrawal  of  care  or treatment,  including  food  and  water,  from  people with disabilities, including newborns, as well as the elderly and infirm, just as we oppose active and passive euthanasia and assisted suicide. ” “Republican leadership has led the effort to prohibit the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion.” “We urge Congress to strengthen the Born Alive Infant Protection Act by enacting appropriate civil and criminal penalties on healthcare providers who fail to provide treatment and care to an infant who survives an abortion.” “We call for legislation to ban sex-selective abortions. and to protect from abortion unborn children who are capable of feeling pain” .

3. Embryonic stem cell research

Democratic Party Platform: “Further, the President issued an executive order repealing the restrictions on embryonic stem cell research.”

Republican Party Platform: “We call for a ban on the use of body parts from aborted fetuses for research. We support and applaud adult stem cell research to develop lifesaving therapies, and we oppose the killing of embryos for their stem cells. We oppose federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.”

4. Human cloning

Democratic Party Platform: Not mentioned

Republican Party Platform: “We urge a ban on human cloning and on the creation of or experimentation on human embryos.”

5. Homosexual practice and homosexual “marriage”

Democratic Party Platform: “This administration hosted the first-ever White House Conference on Bullying Prevention and we must continue our work to prevent vicious bullying of young people and support LGBT youth.” (Many see “prevention of bullying” as code words for promoting homosexual practice among young people) ” Democrats support evidence-based and age-appropriate sex education.” “The President’s record . ending ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’.” . “The Administration has said that the word ‘family’ in immigration includes LGBT relationships.”  “Recognizing that gay rights are human rights. the State Department is funding a program that finances gay rights organizations to combat discrimination, violence, and other abuses.” “We support marriage equality and support the movement to secure equal treatment under law for same-sex couples.”

Republican Party Platform:  “A serious threat to our country’s constitutional order, perhaps even more dangerous than presidential  malfeasance,  is  an  activist  judiciary,  in  which some  judges  usurp  the  powers  reserved  to  other branches of government.  A blatant example has been the court-ordered redefinition of marriage in several States. That is why Congressional Republicans took the lead in enacting the Defense of Marriage Act, affirming the right of States and the federal government not to recognize same-sex relationships licensed in other jurisdictions.

The current Administration’s open defiance of this constitutional principle-in its handling of immigration cases, in federal personnel benefits, in allowing a “same-sex marriage” at a military base, and  in  refusing  to  defend  DOMA (The Defense of Marriage Act)  in  the  courts-makes a mockery of the President’s inaugural oath.” “We reaffirm our support for a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.” “With a Republican Administration, the (Justice) Department will fulfill its responsibility to defend all federal laws in court, including the Defense of Marriage Act.” “We support the First Amendment right of freedom of association of the Boy Scouts of America and other service organizations whose values are under assault and condemn the State blacklisting of religious groups which decline to arrange adoptions by same-sex couples.” ” The effectiveness of our foreign aid has been limited by the cultural agenda of the current Administration, attempting to impose on foreign countries, especially the peoples of Africa, legalized abortion and the homosexual rights agenda.”

6. Contraception (addition to the original list)

Democratic Party Platform: “As a result of our efforts, today. People with private insurance are getting . FDA-approved contraception with no out-of-pocket costs.” “And that’s why the Affordable Care Act is ending health insurance discrimination against women, and provides women with free access to . contraception.”" The Affordable Care Act ensures that
women have access to contraception in their health insurance plans.”

Republican Party Platform: “We oppose school-based clinics that provide referrals, counseling, and related services for abortion and contraception.” “The most offensive instance of this war on religion has been the current Administration’s attempt to compel faith-related institutions, as well as believing individuals, to contravene their deeply held religious,  moral,  or  ethical  beliefs  regarding  health services,  traditional  marriage,  or  abortion.”

So there you have it. As the Bishops say, “Catholic teaching challenges voters and candidates, citizens and elected officials, to consider the moral and ethical dimensions of public policy issues.” As Bishop Morlino of Madison, Wisconsin, reminded us recently, “A Catholic conscience can never take exception to the prohibition of actions which are intrinsically evil.” Never has the choice been clearer than in this election. Please consider the platforms prayerfully, and vote as your conscience, “the voice of God resounding in your heart”, directs you.

———-

Dr. Frederick Liewehr is an endodontist who teaches and works in private practice. He converted from Protestantism to Catholicism in 1983, having been drawn ineluctably to Christ’s Church by the light of Truth. He is a member of St. Benedict parish in Richmond, a Fourth Degree Knight of Columbus and a Cooperator of Opus Dei.

 

 

August 28, 2012 / MariaNews.com 

Cardinal Keith O’Brien Calls Scotland to Defend the Truth about Marriage

By Catholic Online

Catholic Online (http://www.catholic.org)

Do not misunderstand the teaching of the Catholic Church concerning the true nature of marriage and the family and society founded upon it. This is objective truth, revealed in the Natural Law and thus knowable and binding on all men and women in every Nation. We must resist the lies and the lure of those who seek to keep us behind our Church doors in our defense of this truth. Yes, the Church, through Scripture and Tradition, opens up the depth of this truth concerning the nature and ends of marriage for those who believe. However, the objective nature of marriage is not simply a matter of our “religious position” as Christians.

GLASKOW, Scotland, UK (Catholic Online) – Keith Patrick Cardinal O’Brien is one of many heroic Catholic Bishops who have taken their place on the front line of the battle of our age to defend true marriage and the family and society founded upon it. When the history is written of this monumental struggle for the soul of western civilization, he will be included in the ranks of a growing number of courageous Catholic Church leaders who took their stand and would not be moved.

Make no mistake, this is a battle. St. Paul reminded the early Christians in Ephesus, “our struggle is not with flesh and blood but with the principalities, with the powers, with the world rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in the heavens. Therefore, put on the armor of God – that you may be able to resist on the evil day and, having done everything, to hold your ground.” (Eph. 6:12, 13)

We are facing an intense spiritual war against the very idea of the existence of objective truths in a contemporary age which has been besieged by the false propaganda of what Pope Benedict XVI properly called a “Dictatorship of Relativism.” Relativism is an ideology which maintains the there are no truths upon which to ground and inform daily life. That “your truth” is equal to “my truth” – in short, there is not truth. We serve Jesus Christ, the One who proclaims to the world waiting to be born, “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life”. (John 14:6)

We who are baptized into Christ now live our lives as members of His Body, which St. Paul reminded his disciple Timothy, is “the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.” The truths which this Church proclaims and defends in the social order, such as the truth about marriage and the family and society founded upon it, are revealed in the Natural Law. They are the very foundation for every truly human and just social order. They are not simply “religious matters” to be kept to oursleves, locked up, figuratively or literally, behind our Church doors.

To be able to stand and fight in this battle, It will also help to remember these words which the Apostle addressed to the Christians in Ephesus, “stand fast with your loins girded in truth, clothed with righteousness as a breastplate, and your feet shod in readiness for the gospel of peace. In all circumstances, hold faith as a shield, to quench all [the] flaming arrows of the evil one.And take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. With all prayer and supplication, pray at every opportunity in the Spirit”.(Eph 6: 14-19a)

In a March 3, 2012 editorial opinion in the secular newspaper the London Telegraph entitled “We cannot afford to indulge this madness“, Cardinal  O’Brien spoke boldly to the broader society of the United kingdom concerning the effort to – by secular fiat- compel a moral and legal equivalency be given between homosexual partnerships and truth marriage:

“The Government is this month launching a consultation on same-sex marriage, asking the public whether it should be introduced in England and Wales. I hope many respond and consider signing the petition in support of traditional marriage organised by a new organization, the Coalition for Marriage. On the surface, the question of same-sex marriage may seem to be an innocuous one. Civil partnerships have been in place for several years now, allowing same-sex couples to register their relationship and enjoy a variety of legal protections.

“When these arrangements were introduced, supporters were at pains to point out that they didn’t want marriage, accepting that marriage had only ever meant the legal union of a man and a woman. Those of us, who were not in favor of civil partnership, believing that such relationships are harmful to the physical, mental and spiritual wellbeing of those involved, warned that in time marriage would be demanded too. We were accused of scaremongering then, yet exactly such demands are upon us now.

“Since all the legal rights of marriage are already available to homosexual couples, it is clear that this proposal is not about rights, but rather is an attempt to redefine marriage for the whole of society at the behest of a small minority of activists. Redefining marriage will have huge implications for what is taught in our schools, and for wider society. It will redefine society since the institution of marriage is one of the fundamental building blocks of society. The repercussions of enacting same-sex marriage into law will be immense.

“But can we simply redefine terms at a whim? Can a word whose meaning has been clearly understood in every society throughout history suddenly be changed to mean something else? If same-sex marriage is enacted into law what will happen to the teacher who wants to tell pupils that marriage can only mean – and has only ever meant – the union of a man and a woman?

“Will that teacher’s right to hold and teach this view be respected or will it be removed? Will both teacher and pupils simply become the next victims of the tyranny of tolerance, heretics, whose dissent from state-imposed orthodoxy must be crushed at all costs?

“In Article 16 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, marriage is defined as a relationship between men and women. But when our politicians suggest jettisoning the established understanding of marriage and subverting its meaning they aren’t derided. Instead, their attempt to redefine reality is given a polite hearing, their madness is indulged. Their proposal represents a grotesque subversion of a universally accepted human right.

“As an institution, marriage long predates the existence of any state or government. It was not created by governments and should not be changed by them. Instead, recognizing the innumerable benefits which marriage brings to society, they should act to protect and uphold marriage, not attack or dismantle it.

“This is a point of view that would have been endorsed and accepted only a few years ago, yet today advancing a traditional understanding of marriage risks one being labeled an intolerant bigot.There is no doubt that, as a society, we have become blasé about the importance of marriage as a stabilizing influence and less inclined to prize it as a worthwhile institution.

“It has been damaged and undermined over the course of a generation, yet marriage has always existed in order to bring men and women together so that the children born of those unions will have a mother and a father. “This brings us to the one perspective which seems to be completely lost or ignored: the point of view of the child. All children deserve to begin life with a mother and father; the evidence in favor of the stability and well-being which this provides is overwhelming and unequivocal. It cannot be provided by a same-sex couple, however well-intentioned they may be.

“Same-sex marriage would eliminate entirely in law the basic idea of a mother and a father for every child. It would create a society which deliberately chooses to deprive a child of either a mother or a father.

“Other dangers exist. If marriage can be redefined so that it no longer means a man and a woman but two men or two women, why stop there? Why not allow three men or a woman and two men to constitute a marriage, if they pledge their fidelity to one another? If marriage is simply about adults who love each other, on what basis can three adults who love each other be prevented from marrying?

“In November 2003, after a court decision in Massachusetts to legalize gay marriage, school libraries were required to stock same-sex literature; primary schoolchildren were given homosexual fairy stories such as King & King. Some high school students were even given an explicit manual of homosexual advocacy entitled The Little Black Book: Queer in the 21st Century. Education suddenly had to comply with what was now deemed “normal”.

“Disingenuously, the Government has suggested that same-sex marriage wouldn’t be compulsory and churches could choose to opt out. This is staggeringly arrogant. No Government has the moral authority to dismantle the universally understood meaning of marriage. Imagine for a moment that the Government had decided to legalize slavery but assured us that “no one will be forced to keep a slave”.

“Would such worthless assurances calm our fury? Would they justify dismantling a fundamental human right? Or would they simply amount to weasel words masking a great wrong? The Universal Declaration on Human Rights is crystal clear: marriage is a right which applies to men and women, “the family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State”.

“This universal truth is so self-evident that it shouldn’t need to be repeated. If the Government attempts to demolish a universally recognized human right, they will have forfeited the trust which society has placed in them and their intolerance will shame the United Kingdom in the eyes of the world.”

The editorial in a secular newspaper concluded with this identification of the Churchman,

“Cardinal O’Brien is President of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland and Britain’s most senior Catholic.”

On Sunday, August 26, 2012, at every ambo in Scotland the faithful heard a pastoral letter read. It reinforced these words from the Cardinal, “With this letter we will announce the creation of a National Commission for Marriage and the Family, a body which will be charged with promoting the true nature of marriage, it will develop an online presence and produce materials and organize events which will help Catholic families to support and sustain marriage. While we pray that our elected leaders will sustain rather than subvert marriage, we promise to continue to do everything we can to convince them that redefining marriage would be wrong for society.”

I urge all of our readers to pray for this heroic Cardinal of Scotland. We also need to imitate his effort in every Nation of the West where this “madness” has been unleashed. Do not misunderstand the teaching of the Catholic Church concerning the true nature of marriage and the family and society founded upon it. This is objective truth, revealed in the Natural Law and thus knowable and binding on all men and women in every Nation. We must defend the objectively true nature of marriage. We must resist the lies and the lure of those who seek to keep us behind our Church doors in our defense of this truth.

Yes, the Church, through Scripture and Tradition, opens up the depth of this truth concerning the nature and ends of marriage for those who believe. Yes, the Magisterium (teaching office) of the Catholic Church offers the fullness of the meaning of that truth for all who seek to find it. However, the objective nature of marriage is not simply a matter of our “religious position” as Christians. We cannot, we must not, we will not, back down from proclaiming it from the housetops. Marriage – and the family and society founded upon it- serves the true Common Good of every society. Marriage cannot ever be replaced by some counterfeit structure pretending to provide some alternative to their indispensable role.

The Cardinal declared August 26, 2012 “National Marriage Sunday” in all of the Catholic Churches in Scotland. The Pastoral Letter which was read in all of Scotland’s 500 Catholic parishes. He was forced to break off discussions with the secular government when, in spite of repeated overtures from the Catholic Church, other Christian traditions, other religious believers and an overwhelming number of other people of good will who recognize that true marriage serves the common good, the secular government announced its intention to impose its will on the whole of society and reject the Natural Law.

Get ready. Pray. Prepare. Persevere. The battle is engaged. Our Cardinals and Bishops are our teachers. We are the ones enlisted on the front lines of this historic struggle for the very future of the West. This is our hour.

Subscribe to MariaNews.com