Discuss Douglas W. Kmiec's 17 Op-Ed article

Paul, you could not have said it any better. After watching the debate and hearing his "eloquent" rhetoric in regards to his abortion stance is all I could take out of it was, "Words just words". Sound familiar!

robin mical @ 8:08 AM PDT, Oct 20, 2008

This is moral relativism at it's finest. A shocking line is that Catholics have voted w/ the top vote getter the last 9 elections? If this were to be true, then we better man up. Carter? Clinton? Yeah, I can see how some Catholics in name only will vote Obama.

Jorge Skorey @ 11:22 PM PDT, Oct 19, 2008

So let me see if I understand this: it's ok to kill an unborn baby as an exercise of individual judgment. Should a baby live to be born, then chances are it will have two Mommies or two Daddies; again, an exercise in "judgment" which again does not take the welfare of the child into consideration. And where is Mahoney in this, his flock in LA county run amok? To use one of his own quotes, "I am so disapointed".

Sue Nomi @ 9:57 PM PDT, Oct 19, 2008

on your soul. And God have mercy on our so called "bishop", Mahoney. This is where a REAL bishop of Christ is supposed to step up to the plate but, we all know, he won't.

God have mercy @ 9:18 PM PDT, Oct 19, 2008

Obama and Kmiec are having their cake and eating it too. Their argument conveniently separates the abortion issue from other Catholic values which stress the institutions of family and marriage. Kmiec asserts that abortions would decrease should welfare assistance to poor mothers increase. What is not stated is that the overwhelming majority of poor mothers on welfare are single who may not have been married in the first place. If I further your logic, these single mothers would have more babies without any policies that would encourage marriage. How can a practicing Catholic support such policies? Obviously you can’t.

Rebecca @ 8:30 PM PDT, Oct 19, 2008

Rebecca, the world would be a better place if all of the "practicing catholics" practiced acting more humanely. You propose that a catholic has the right to take away a woman's choice? Is that what it means to be catholic? To add insult to injury you only recognize mothers whom are married,condemming single mothers. Oh, I forgot the catholic definition of a couple? You should remain in your nasty church, and never come out.

jeanv @ 4:42 PM PDT, Oct 19, 2008

Abortion is non-negotionable. It is mind boggling to think that any civilized nation would shrug it off as being okay. It's wrong. Let's stop taking the Pontious Pilate approach. He knew what he was doing was wrong -but wanted to please the masses. No one's hands are clean who engage in abortion.

Concerned @ 4:11 PM PDT, Oct 19, 2008

Programs assisting poor women and their unborn children do help to reduce the number of abortions, so should be encouraged. While they are one way to recognize human dignity, they do not replace society’s need for universal (the root meaning of “catholic”) respect for the sacredness of human life. A political leader who does not support legal recognition of universal respect for human life is no substitute for one who does.

Dan @ 11:32 AM PDT, Oct 19, 2008

Mr. Kmeic, Just curious how will advise the Catholic faithful what path to take when Mr. Obama signs into law FOCA and our tax dollars are funneled into the abortion industry and we are FORCED to fund this intrinsic evil? However, I'm thinkin' the splanin' to do won't be with us, the people, but to God.

Michael Ehling @ 4:29 AM PDT, Oct 19, 2008

Rationalization of the like we seldom see. The party that purports to look after the most vulnerable has most certainly lost it's way. You need to look at what a person does (voting record) and not what he says to get votes!

Vitaglubet @ 12:47 AM PDT, Oct 19, 2008

Next