Friday, February 15, 2008

Catholics for Obama?   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Last night Douglas W. Kmiec e-mailed this response to Ramesh re: his Slate piece on Obama:

Ramesh Ponnuru’s critique of my Slate article suggesting the positive qualities of Senator Obama from the standpoint of Catholic social teaching and in comparison to President Reagan merits a response.

I regret that Ramesh has never found my writing particularly persuasive, though I think he feigns not to understand the message of my Slate commentary, as if to prevail by bemusement. Over the years I have enjoyed the benefit of Ramesh’s insight, but in this matter he cannot prevail by a type of guilt by character denigration – e.g., his quippy – but I think ultimately ironic – reference to my one-time defense of Harriet Miers. I knew Mrs. Miers to be a hard-working and self-effacing legal counsel to President Bush. As Ramesh knows from the public record, well in advance of a Court vacancy, I had advocated the appointment of Samuel A. Alito Jr. with whom I had worked in the Office of Legal Counsel for President Reagan. Nevertheless, in the era of the Bush administration, we have all become accustomed to biting our lip and giving the president the benefit of the doubt. Therein, the irony to Ramesh’s reference to the Miers episode, as it illustrates the proximate cause of the disaffection with Senator McCain and the possible attractiveness of Senator Obama to Reagan Democrats, Catholics, and I daresay even run-of-the-mill conservatives: the patience to give a Bush sequel yet more "benefit of the doubt" is exhausted. Frankly, many of us who answered Reagan’s call and came to Washington are tired of having only a theoretical commitment to budgetary restraint, limited government, the importance of ensuring the economic well-being of average families, and the lack of measurable progress on respect for life.

The Bush administration, of course, hasn’t been a total disaster, only nearly so. As I see it, President Bush’s major achievement has been the responsible assertion of presidential authority to conduct necessary intelligence to prevent a subsequent terror attack. Of course, there is also the appointment of John Roberts and Sam Alito to the Supreme Court of the United States, but Reaganites know that it was the Gipper who brought these good men into public life and it was the Federalist Society that made the case for a principled understanding of the Constitution that would guide their confirmation.

Now, Ramesh accuses me of being "fact free" or of "not having my fingers on the pulse of American Catholics," so here are some factual considerations that are on this Catholic mind, and judging by the responses received to the Slate article, the minds of many of my fellow Catholics:

1. John McCain has all the appearance of business as usual – Bush II or is it III? That being so, we need to face the reality that we are about to lose the Presidency and the Congress, thanks to the incumbent, and by backing a lackluster, "it’s my turn" Republican who is not perceived as advancing the interests that Catholics care deeply about be it the right to life or the broader social teaching of the Church. Oh yes, we are well aware of Senator Obama’s morally unacceptable position on abortion. No Catholic can or will endorse the taking of innocent life. Indeed, conscience could not just dissuade, but directly preclude, casting a vote in his column. However, Catholic moral teaching enjoins us to work to transform the culture in every vineyard, not just those that are friendly. And Senator Obama has courageously and intriguingly opened a window of opportunity for important conversation across faith traditions, by reminding us that "we should not use faith as a wedge to divide, but instead use faith to resolve cultural tensions and mediate conflicts rather than engage in a politics that exploits them and drives us further from a solution."



2. In Catholic terms, McCain is perceived by many Catholics as wrong on the Iraq war– John Paul II made this plain to President Bush before he invaded, and I suspect Pope Benedict will do the same upon his forthcoming visit; McCain is also wrong on stem-cell research (see McCain’s support for federal funding for research on "spare" embryos) and McCain, of course, is on the more questionable side of the death penalty. Again, in terms of Catholic teaching, McCain is wrong on immigration, and there’s a good case to be made that it is just wrong by any measure, since his border fence is useless and an economically irrational response to the labor needs in the market. Finally, Senator McCain is way behind the curve on the family wage, energy independence and the environment. The Bush administration had eight years to advance alternative fuels, and did little beyond give its support to special-interest agricultural subsidies. Energy independence will do far more to improve our national security posture than the hundreds of billions expended on the unplanned military occupation that followed the end of the President’s major combat operations and that Senator McCain now wishes to continue for a century or more.

3. As for the pulse of American Catholics, I cannot claim to have done a systematic study, but my e-mail this morning mostly runs along the lines of the following note.

"Professor

Fantastic article in Slate. My wife and I and the kids could not agree more.

For several years now, we have been uneasy about the drift of the Republican Party. Despite our disagreement with his pro-abortion position, we find that all of our Catholic sensibilities pull us toward Obama. I, for one, have had it with the fear-mongering, race-baiting and complete indifference to issues of social justice. We did not support this preventive war and are also not overly fond of waterboarding either. We need a new ethos in this country - one which appeals to our better angels, as it were. An ethos informed by the dictum "we are our brother's keeper," to quote Obama the other night in Wisconsin.

Thanks again for putting into words what my wife and I have been feeling for a long time."

4. Ramesh didn’t mention it directly, but others have asked how could the legal adviser to the Romney campaign suddenly show interest in Senator Obama? Ramesh touched upon it however when he expressed the following puzzlement:

I can't say that this passage was the weirdest bit of Kmiec's essay, but it's certainly odd: "But if either Clinton or Obama would acknowledge the myriad problems associated with a declining population in the developed world and affirm the importance of both having and raising children (and not just punting these duties over to Hillary's 'village'), Catholics could well contemplate a Democratic adoption."

Odd? It’s not odd to be concerned about the declining population of the Western world including the United States, and its significant impact on human freedom, economic prosperity, and even military defense. These matters are well considered in abundant research from the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute and other sources so they need not be dwelt upon here.They are anything but "odd." And therein also rests the reconciliation with Governor Romney’s campaign. Romney was not perfect in terms of Catholic social teaching; no Catholic can expect that of any presidential candidate, nor do I. On Catholic terms, for example, I objected to aspects of Governor Romney’s position on immigration, and I very much regretted that the Governor was forced into answering outright lies from Senator McCain about his position on the war. Nevertheless, the Romney campaign was far better focused than the Bush-McCain sequel on the prevention of terrorist attack and the retooling of our Iraqi commitment toward the type of humanitarian infrastructure and civil order rebuilding that the RAND Corporation outlined in 2005, but that the Bush administration ignored and kept hidden until last week.

But the strongest attraction to Governor Romney was his profound understanding of the importance of faith and family to the American experience — these guide his personal life, his family life, and they would have guided his public policy. If you are still puzzled, Ramesh, let me end with the Governor’s own words as he left the public stage:



"Europe is facing a demographic disaster. That is the inevitable product of weakened faith in the Creator, failed families, disrespect for the sanctity of human life and eroded morality. Some reason that culture is merely an accessory to America's vitality; we know that it is the source of our strength. And we are not dissuaded by the snickers and knowing glances when we stand up for family values, and morality, and culture. We will always be honored to stand on principle and to stand for principle."

Deacon Keith Fournier in a very thoughtful commentary on Catholic online exploring how the religious right lost its religion explains how it is not possible to fit faithful Catholics (or for that matter faithful Christians of any confession) into the contemporary political categories of left or right or liberal or conservative. He notes that no major political party should ever expect to have a "lock" on Catholic or Christian support. It is true that, until the advent of Senator Obama, the contemporary American left or liberal movement and the Democratic Party left faithful Christians behind. When Democrats worry more about their activist counter-cultural agendas than defending the rights of the average working person or the elderly or the impoverished, they push Christians out of their ranks. When the Republicans wed themselves to outworn ideas that do not advance the dignity of life, the primacy of family, authentic human freedom and the well-being of all, including the poor, they do the same. Contrary to the individualism of the age, freedom is not found in solitude. Nor is it found in retreating into the same intellectual enclaves that divide "us" against "them."

To date, Senator Obama has kept the essence of his campaign at the level of the statesmen, which is why many Catholics, including myself, find this to be a favorable comparison to the memory of Ronald Wilson Reagan.

02/15 11:54 AMShare