Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Mass. Senate Candidates - Coakley and Capuano Defend Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.) in Schism with R.I. Bishop - Politician’s and The Catholic Church


Controvery over Abortion: Bishop Tobin and Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) image: CNA

FromThe Boston Globe: A recent forum on Boston’s Public Television WBGH between Democrat Senate Candidates; touched on the subject of the rift between Rhode Island Congressional Representative, Patrick Kennedy, and the Bishop of Rhode Island Thomas Tobin. Tobin had asked Kennedy to refrain from participating in the Sacrament of Communion, a decision made over Kennedy’s support for federally funded abortions in the Health Care Reform Bill passed by the Congress, as well as Kennedy’s public rebuke of the Church. Kennedy chose to make this a political issue, going directly to the press with a complaint against the “Church”.

Now, Senate Candidate Coakley and Capuano are siding with Kennedy in their quest to win the Democrat primary on December 8th. The two supporting Kennedy also stated they would not support the Health Care Reform without public funded abortions, while Pagliuca and Khazei, the other contenders for the seat, stated that their support for the Senate Bill does not rest on the abortion issue.

The Catholic Church has become publicly vocal to its opposition to abortion, more so now than in the past election cycles where John Kerry and Nancy Pelosi were chastised by their Bishops for abortion support. The question remains, however, if public officials openly espouse support for legislation that runs contrary to their religion (regardless of denomination), and are then chastised by the church, is it a public or private issue? In the instance between Kennedy and Tobin, Kennedy chose to make the issue public – creating a political debate where none should exist. It is a question of having two “masters” so to speak, one spiritual and one secular, and the individual, whether politician or layperson, who has a full understanding of their chosen “Church”, should be well aware of the Church Doctrine. Church membership is not a right, rather a privilege, and a personal commitment to follow a specific set of teachings. When one deviates from the Church’s teachings for political expedience, then should one be surprised when admonishment follows? The logical answer is no – an individual educated in any given Church doctrine, is well aware of consequences, and therefore, must make the choice between being a Catholic and or looking for a religion that suits their political bent.

The fact that Coakley and Capuano both voiced support for Kennedy over the Church, as Catholics, gives them the opportunity for further headlines, should their Bishop decide to chastise them over a public rebuff of Church teachings. Although Catholics make up the majority of the Democrat electorate in Massachusetts, it is doubtful that a candidate’s support for abortion would factor into their vote. Catholics overwhelming supported Barack Obama in the 2008 election, with full knowledge that he was a pro-abortion candidate. In instances of Party loyalty, and the separation of Church and State, the Catholic voter most often (or in the past) has forgone the Church for the Party at the polls.

As to Kennedy, who is up for re-election in 2010 used the opportunity to publicly cry “foul” and it worked. When one “Googles” Patrick Kennedy, the articles regarding his “issue of faith”, total well over 1,400. Coakley and Capuano decision has also resulted in a good deal of press, all tied to the Kennedy query. It is all about the press, and political posturing - nothing more and nothing less. The Catholic Church, is then chastised for its involvement in “public affairs”, the scandal that struck the church in the in the 1990’s, is the first issue brought to bear – as if the Church Doctrine and those members of the Church who were decidedly criminal – are one in the same.

Of course, the debate over the abortion issue may not be the one issue that sways a voter, regardless of party, in 2010 and 2012. Health Care Reform is rife with fiscal issues, from deficits to an expensive public option, and these will weigh a great deal more than the social issue. Fairly or unfairly, depending upon ones point of view, it is time for those politicians’ who belong to a Church that upholds the right to life, to either step aside from their Church or their party. There are myriad Churches available in the United States, given freedom of religion, and certainly one would be more than willing to embrace a Kennedy with open arms.

1 comment:

ralph Short said...

I thought you made a great point regarding this issue when you state Mr. Kennedy should be looking for a different religion. I do not see how one can reconcile being for abortion with being a Catholic. In addition, to insist on taxpayer funds to finance it when he knows full well that millions of people, catholic and otherwise, are vehemently opposed to it on moral grounds is criminal in my view.

This is just another example of how we are splitting apart as a nation. It is not only that our values are radically different, it is also due to the malevolent effort to force these values on fellow citizens.

You are also correct in stating that this is just one part of the health care debate.


Amazon Picks

Massachusetts Conservative Feminist - Degrees of Moderation and Sanity Headline Animator

FEEDJIT Live Traffic Map

Contact Me:

Your Name
Your Email Address
Subject
Message