I would offer two insights. First, sadly the abortion mentality is so pervasive in American culture; a devout, pro-life Catholic may not have a bona fide pro-life choice in elections. Second, moral theology teaches us that there is a difference between direct consequences (i.e. a Catholic cannot vote for someone with the intent of expanding or perpetuating abortion) and indirect consequences (this would be choosing the politician who, when no truly pro-life option is available, is the best on the gamut of issues encompassed by Catholic social teaching).
...that response is very carefully constructed to avoid....ahhhh.....conflict within the Archdiocese. It is true that McCain is not "100%" pro-life (ESCR is a problem.)
A better picture is given here.
Obama has promised to sign "first thing," the FOCA, which will have effects:
...Since the Webster and Casey opinions, the Supreme Court has upheld State limitations on abortion, such as requiring parental involvement, informed consent and prohibiting government funding of most abortion. The Court also recently outlawed most so called “partial birth abortions”. FOCA would undo all of this, essentially nullifying any limitations on abortion on demand through all nine months.
I maintain that it is simply preposterous to ignore Obama's promise on FOCA. One can do so, of course--if one contemplates that McCain actually will act to support ESCR--a position on which McCain has been notably ambiguous recently.
Obama is NOT ambiguous about FOCA, and a Democrat Congress will deliver it to him for signature.
As the cited blog notes, quoting Cdl. Rigali:
No one who sponsors or supports legislation like FOCA can credibly claim to be part of a good-faith discussion on how to reduce abortions
Fr. Hartmann also fails to mention Obama's full-bore support of killing children who survive abortions--which should give pause to even the most bloodthirsty supporters of Obama in the Milwaukee area.
At some point in time, it will be evident to Fr. Hartmann (as it is to many other thinking people) that "Catholic social teaching" begins with "the common good." And wholesale support of abortion, no-holds-barred, is distinctly opposed to "the common good."
As to the "social goods" promised by Obama and seemingly so important to Fr. Hartmann--it seems that the good Father believes that Obama might end poverty, disease, and war, not to mention institute Universal Health Care--a dubitable proposition in the first place.
Really, Father? I have a bridge in Brooklyn which you might like to purchase...
Here are the New York Bishops on that:
It is the rare candidate who will agree with the Church on every issue. But as the U.S. Bishops’ recent document Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship makes clear, not every issue is of equal moral gravity. The inalienable right to life of every innocent human person outweighs other concerns where Catholics may use prudential judgment, such as how best to meet the needs of the poor or to increase access to health care for all
Perhaps that statement would disturb David Newby, Tom Barrett, and other heavy-hitter Milwaukee area poohbahs--some of whom are Catholic. But that's kinda too bad, eh?
HT: Jay Anderson, Terry Berres