1. One can never positively and directly commit even the slightest evil;
2. to avoid a greater evil, one may tolerate a lesser evil committed by others, provided one does not approve of it as such and remembers the existence of a greater good to strive for.
This doctrine is fundamental for orientation in a confused age in which the notion of the principle has been lost: “Bonum ex integra causa, malum ex quocumque defectu”(St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I-IIae, q. 18, a. 4 ad 3).
In light of this principle, a Catholic can never vote for or approve an abortion law, even a minimal one, but he or she can vote for a candidate who is not an integral anti-abortionist. That is why it is permissible for an American Catholic to vote for Donald Trump, whose positions on abortion, as Edward Feser notes, leave much to be desired . In fact, Trump is in favor of keeping abortion legal in cases of rape, incest, and endangerment of the mother, and merely treats state murder as a purely procedural matter, relating to the government, central or local, that should regulate it. Moreover, the Republican Party platform at the Milwaukee convention last July 8 did not include a reference to a nationwide ban on abortion for the first time in 40 years. However, Trump does not make abortion a flag, unlike his opponent Kamala Harris. Harris' socialist and egalitarian agenda includes restoring the constitutional right to abortion, which was enshrined in Roe v. Wade in 1973, and overturned by the Supreme Court's June 24, 2022, decision. Moreover, during the 2019 primaries, Kamala announced that she would pass on her first day in the White House. the Equality Act, to guarantee all forms of rights to the Lgbt world (on the subject, see her book The Truths we hold. An American journey, Vintage, 2021, pp. 112-120).
The Democratic vice presidential candidate, Tim Walz, a leading member of the Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party, is, if possible, even more left-wing than Kamala Harris. Despite the media's insistence on Kamala Harris's moderation, if the Democrats win in November the process of moral decay in the United States will be accelerated by the Harris-Walz ticket, among the most progressive in the history of this country. [Read the rest at Rorate Caeli...]
Thank you for this.
ReplyDeleteI pray it makes a difference.
Life in a Marxist state terrifies me.
But … if it comes, I (like the Physics professor depicted here - a true story repeated countless times)
https://youtu.be/aS8c6hLj7uA?feature=shared
… if it comes, I will do my duty to the end.
Every vote I have ever cast has been for the lesser of two evils. St. Francis of Assisi just never appears on the ballot.
ReplyDeleteExcept Donald Trump is not the lesser of two evils. He just stabbed every pro-lifer in Florida in the back. If he is any better than Harris, the difference is infinitesimal.
ReplyDeletePhlogiston,
DeleteJavier Milei was interviewed on Tucker last year. Asked about abortion he was able to provide a concise, consistent, logical defense of life: “the baby is human at conception, what else would you call it; therefor it is murder to kill it from the moment of conception”.
There was no confusion or exceptions or wringing of hands. Protect innocent life from the moment it is conceived with a soul made in the image and likeness of God.
Trump is not that. Trump is a pagan and has no logical defense of of life. With him it is all practical calculation. His position on abortion and IVF is completely unacceptable. What he said in the latest interview in Florida is no mere omission of an ally. He defined himself as an enemy of life. It may well lose him the election.
There really is no greater issue in our nation right now - abortion is killing babies, and also our national soul. There can be no exception: defend life as sacred from God at the moment life is conceived and “ensouled”.
Javier Milei shows how it is done. Life is sacred. Period. Watch his Tucker interview. Abortion discussion begins at 9:57.
https://youtu.be/h0-8tAtJStM?feature=shared
Brilliant.
We can do better than that. Peter Sonski is the least of seven evils. By a mile.
ReplyDeleteRoberto de Mattei always writes his articles from his point of view. He is very tricky, be careful.
ReplyDeleteHe makes a right statement in one way, but his world view is based on very little knowledge, or he purposefully distorts the truth. In other words, he is Mattei de Roberto.
We all write from our own point of view. Your ad hominem attack from an anonymous position is, in my opinion, "very tricky" and shows "very little knowledge". Your accusation that he "distorts the truth" is not backed up with any evidence. In other words, your comment illustrates something negative about you; not Roberto de Mattei.
Delete"She asked Trump where he stood on the matter.
ReplyDeleteThe former president cited an Alabama Supreme Court ruling in February that found frozen embryos should be considered children, a decision he and other Republicans have criticized. He said he came out with a very strong statement against that ruling.
Trump agreed that IVF has worked well for many families, giving them a child they might not otherwise have been able to have. Because of that, he said, his administration, should he win in November, is looking into either making the government pay for IVF treatments, or mandating that insurance pay for it.
It's "gonna be great," he said.
Gabbard said such a move would be "life-changing" for so many families. She said many people go into debt just in the hopes of starting a family of their own.
Trump, in response, echoed a statement he made earlier Thursday in Michigan, "We want babies in this country," he said."
End quote.
We could continue to blindly insist that Trump is naive or we could face the likelihood that he was hired as a reality actor democrat planted to make conservatives lockdown or embrace frankentube new world where they would not have under a president who admitted he was a Democrat.
rohrbach,
DeleteThe moment Trump comes out positively in favor of abortion is the moment my support ends.
IVF is an abortion factory - creates life in order to freeze it and kill it. It’s horrible - unacceptable.
Saying he would veto national life legislation - unacceptable.
Supporting any extensions in time to abortion limits - unacceptable.
His latest positions may be deal-breakers. We’ll see what he does.
Neutrality is one thing.
A positive enemy is something else.
Aqua,
DeleteTrump is already there. He made very clear that Florida's current abortion ban after a heartbeat can be detected (six weeks) is "too soon" for him. That is enough for him to be identified as pro-abortion. I challenge anyone to draft a realistic definition of "prolife" that encompasses his views. He is not prolife. He may be a "moderate" pro-abortionist, but he is still pro-abortion.
You're absolutely right, Phlogiston. Everyone who allows "even a little bit of abortion" is not pro-life. The person who favors killing the baby because his dad is a rapist or a relative, the person who favors killing the baby because the mother's physical or mental health is in danger. They are all pro-abortion. I know doctors who say they have never seen a case where a mother's health requires an abortion. It is a heartstring strategy to fool people. Pro life doctors treat both patients and deliver the baby early if necessary. Trump is not pro-life and never has been. He is still a better choice than the alternative. I will not help put a radical Marxist team in the White House who prey not only on the unborn but on my already born grandchildren. I don't expect Trump to be St. Michael the Archangel and will do what I can to hold his feet to the fire. That's what every Catholic should be doing.
DeleteThat’s a tough one.
DeleteI’m ok with neutrality.
Active support … kind of a game changer.
He needs to repent and choose life - pronto.
Trump has never been neutral, Aqua. He's a politician and politics corrupts. He's losing ground because of politics. Think of Pontius Pilate. He wanted to release Christ, but he was afraid of losing his position. Trump was never pro-life, just less pro-abortion than the alternative. That is still true, but less true than previously. Very sad.
DeleteMary Ann K,
DeleteYeah …
But *not mentioning abortion* and -*staying out of the fight* is different than saying he would specifically veto legislation that established a national right to life; different than specifically saying six weeks is not long enough, he wants more abortion, later abortion; different than saying he wants the federal government to fund all IVF - making IVF collateral damage abortions a national right. That then becomes the “poison” Debbie mentioned in a related post, not the “absence of a remedy” I said in my response. We can’t positively vote for “poison”, as Roberto de Mattei says above.
Staying out of the way is one thing.
Staking a clear position to advance death is another.
Staking a position to veto life, a death imprimatur.
What I’ve seen reported today about Trump’s position is not acceptable.
He needs to repent, and change. Embrace life; reject death - MAGA is dead without that.
So we're going from "most prolife president ever" to "Trump was never prolife"?
DeleteCounterpoint:
Deletehttps://x.com/kylenabecker/status/1829454153401155836
The opposition Democrats are evil, always have been.
That also, is compelling.
Tough one.
By my definition of pro-life, we've never had a pro-life president. Not one! They all favored killing babies conceived by rape or incest and supported abortion for the bogus "health of the mother" myth. There is no health condition that cannot be treated by respecting both the mother and the baby. Trump has done more good for the pro-life movement than most presidents. This is the time for pro-lifers to demand clarity and call him to respect life. He got pushback in Florida which is good. He's trying to play both sides right now, an impossible situation. We need to help him realize that. He is still the best viable option.
DeleteAnonymous, Trump did appoint Supreme Court justices who reversed Roe v Wade. Not even Reagan did that. But his goal was not prolife per se and everyone knows it. And frankly, government funded IVF, as he's proposing, is no better than government funded direct abortion. In any event, it seems someone was able to talk at least some sense into Trump and he has now clearly said he will vote against Florida Amendment 4. Which is a relief. I can almost convince myself that he is actually the lesser of two evils now.
Delete