I have a lot of thoughts about what is going on at Notre Dame right now, so I figured I would express them here. This entry is going to deal with religion and the abortion debate, so some of you may want to skip it. (Although you may be surprised by my take on it.) An interesting side note, I rarely talk about religion in my day-to-day life. In fact, some people who know me are surprised to learn I even go to church. But I feel since it is easy for you to skip an entry if it bothers you, I have a bit more liberty to discuss such issues on my blog.
Right now, at Notre Dame, a number of people are protesting the decision to have Obama give a commencement address. They argue that a Catholic college should not allow him to speak since he is pro-choice. Although I am strongly pro-life, I disagree for a number of reasons.
- First, in the New Testament, Jesus clearly says, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” If Obama should not be allowed to speak because of his pro-choice views, are we going to start cataloging people’s sins before we allow them to speak? Because if we start to do that, no one will be able to speak.
- The Catholic church has spoken of a “consistent ethic of life.” This means the Catholic church is against both abortion and the death penalty. However, the death penalty seems to rarely be mentioned. I think this is because it is harder to stand up and say people like Timothy McVeigh deserve to live than it is to argue for an unborn child. However, Christianity is not meant to be easy. Jesus was often criticized for associating with prostitutes and tax collectors (as an aside, it always kind of makes me laugh that tax collectors are grouped with prostitutes – do people really hate paying taxes that much?) I don’t know if George W. Bush ever spoke at Norte Dame, but if he did I bet the outcry was far less. And he was a strong proponent of the death penalty.
- Too often the “pro-life movement” could be more accurately termed the “pro-birth movement” because to be truly pro-life means you also care for the baby once it is here. This means we need more of a social safety net to ensure babies born into difficult circumstances have access to food, health care, and when the time comes, high-quality education. The policies of the Bush administration caused the poor to become poorer and did little to help the lives that are here now. I also strongly believe that to be pro-life means you do not set up a policy that condones torture. How is that respecting life? And how is it that Bush did not see that as a contradiction? Frankly, I am still baffled by that. Just as I am baffled by people who bomb abortion clinics. Not only is it clearly wrong, it makes absolutely no sense.
I support Obama because he stands up against torture and advocates for social policies that help those who are here now. I may not agree with him when it comes to being pro-choice, but I respect him for being open to dialogue about it. And I think all those protesting at Notre Dame would do well to realize that the most effective way to be Christian is to respond with love, not hate, and to engage in discussion, not condemnation. Do not judge, lest you your self be judged.
