More proof that Progressives use theology to be able to vote as they please. Pick outcome than theologize to get there.
M. Cathleen Kaveny essay in America magazine.
We cannot simply set 1.5 million annual abortions on the negative side of the equation as if they are entirely caused by one vote. A single vote for a pro-choice politician is not likely to make any significant difference to any particular woman’s decision for or against abortion, given that abortion is currently a constitutionally protected right in this country. In fact, we might well judge that voting for a candidate who supports a large safety net for mothers and dependent children would be a better way to increase the number of children brought to term, especially at the state level.
As if this safety net will protect those children who have doctors coming at them with scalpels, chemicals, and suction equipment. Plus government is so effective at reducing what they aim at – at least in regards to our wallets. There is of course the fact that a politician who votes for the slaughtering of the innocent will have the moral insight to create such an effective safety net – yeah that is someone who knows how to make wise choices and should be trusted with your vote.
50,000,000 plus killed here in the U.S. and we are talking about safety nets – give me a break.
The Cardinal Newman Society points out that she was part of Obama’s Catholic Outreach Program and:
She goes on to cast doubt on the usefulness of the traditional Catholic moral theology system of determining cooperation with evil, and suggests it is necessary to “develop new ways of analyzing the involvement of individuals in systemic structures of complicity.”
Yes, develop new ways to excuse voting that allows the continued murder of the child in the womb.