The anti-abortion crowd is very concerned about the souls of Catholic lawmakers today. They’re swarming AOC, well, who wouldn’t, she’s smart as a whip and can take down a right wing talking point in a single tweet. Then there was this:
This is analogous to the Catholic question that John F. Kennedy was asked back in 1960. The implicit assumption was that he would place his fealty to his religion and the pope over defending the US constitution. That was the fear of a lot of white Anglo Saxon Protestants back then. But he assured a slim majority that he wasn’t going to take orders from the pope.
Joe Biden is hewing to that line. He’s not going to check his support of the constitution in order to comply with the Vatican. He didn’t take an oath to the Vatican when he was inaugurated. He took an oath to defend the constitution. As a faithful Catholic, I’m fairly sure that he’s not pro-abortion. There are very few people in this country, if any, who are pro-abortion. But the first amendment does protect freedom of religion and he has quite a few constituents who are not Catholic.
So even if the pope had a say over Joe’s opposition to abortion, Joe does not have the right to impose this view on others. In other words, we do not all have to become Catholic. Joe is leaving the choice up to the people who are affected by abortion the most and that is not the nebby busy bodies in the anti-abortion movement.
I sense that the tweeters are starting to change their tactics a bit today. More than one has said that their opposition is not religiously based. It’s based on ethics. Ok. I’ll bite. Let’s talk about ethics. The choice issue is very much like the Trolley dilemma ethics problem.

It turns out that how you solve that problem depends in part on your culture. The solution could be either outcome. It is a choice you have to live with and you weigh the rightness of the solution depending on many factors.
“Oh, but it’s MURDER!!”, they wail. Yes. In the above example, someone(s) is going to die. That’s the problem. Are you going to condemn only one person or 5? There’s a variation that requires the problem solver to decide whether to push a man off a bridge to stop the trolley from hitting the five people. This is actually much closer to the actual abortion problem. In the first problem, all the solver needs to do is throw a switch. Maybe the trolley kills someone, maybe it stops in time, maybe the people on the track get out of the way. But in the second instance, the problem solver has to actively kill someone to save other people.
This is what it’s like to have choice. It is a very difficult choice. I don’t think the religious, I mean, newly converted “ethicists” actually appreciate that.
But let’s get back to Catholicism. I’m so glad these anti-abortion activists are finally bringing up the topic of religion because, goddess knows, we heard enough of their yelling and screaming about how unfair and impolitic it would be to ask Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barret, Roberts or Thomas about their attitudes towards their catholic religious teachings. For the record, Gorsuch is now an Episcopalian but he graduated from a Jesuit prep school. I think he is a convert to episcopalianism so he might as well be Catholic. That right there is 6 Catholic Supreme Court justices. I believe Sotomayor is Catholic as well but she seems to be perturbed by the constitutionality of putting enforcement of state laws into the hands of private citizens. She seems to be ruling in the JFK manner.
What about the other 6 Catholic justices? We couldn’t ask them about whether they would put the constitution first. It should have been a legitimate question. Why is it that so many Conservative presidents nominated Catholics? They could have chosen Sikhs, or a Buddhist or a Quaker or an atheist. But they didn’t. Each and every time there was an opening they could appoint or steal, they chose a Catholic. Once or twice is reasonable. But SIX times? That is definitely a trend, nay, a correlation.
I think there is a lot of culture that a Catholic brings to the court. Their religion teaches them that abortion is wrong but as we have seen above, public servants at their level are expected to serve the US Constitution not Pope Francis. Also, they are taught from an early age to revere authority. But you know, it’s not a requirement. You can think for yourself as you uphold constitutional principles. It should be noted though that women have no authority in the Catholic Church. Maybe they did in elementary school but they don’t write papal bulls or vote on the next pontiff or get to be cardinals or bishops or priests.
Anyway, they can’t get around the party that brought them to power. The were nominated because they were more likely to adhere to the Republican Party platform, and all that it stands for, some of it unjust and not pretty. And for the most part, they have, even if that means they are opening up American jurisprudence to all kinds of outcomes that we will all regret later. They are smart enough to think things through and I have no doubt that they have.
Filed under: General | 17 Comments »