A crushing rejoinder
When a dean from Notre Dame has an op-ed piece published in the New York Times, you can be confident that he's attacking, not defending, Church teaching.
If you used that rule of thumb to make a bet about Mark Roche's essay in the Monday Times, you made some money. In this case, Roche is arguing that good Catholics should vote for Kerry.
Fortunately there are some solid Catholic professors on campus who have the capacity to set things straight-- even if they can't get their work into the Times. Law professor Gerry Bradley combines with Princeton's Robert George in a devastating critique of Roche's argument, available through National Review Online. Don't miss it; their demolition of the pro-Kerry argument is complete.
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: -
Oct. 15, 2004 2:37 PM ET USA
Yeah, I see the logic. Kerry supports abortions to help end them, even if he does support these lives to be the supply of medical goods. Plus when Kerry is elected the streets will be paved in gold and there will be more troops in Iraq. Don't forget a little social prudence with your social justice.
Posted by: -
Oct. 14, 2004 9:08 PM ET USA
The absolute stupidity of the proportional argument is amazing. How can the deaths of 4000 innocents a day be compared to capital punishment, poverty etc. A nation is truly known by how it treats its most vulnerable; we murder our defenseless babies in the womb. Our "Catholic" Senators subscribe to "enlightened Catholics like Mr. Roche and vote to continue the slaughter. Kerry even supports and backs "late term abortions"; truly reprerhensible! Roche and McBrien; are they Catholic?