Ha! Duped again, yes! Jonathan, tune into the Republican debate tonight where five men are competing for the REPUBLICAN nomination for the highest office in the land. How many are “advancing anti-abortion policies”? Exactly.

Probably one more to join Roberts, Thomas, Scalia and Alito. Thank you for asking. Oh, and in regard to Roe, your numbers are incorrect. Marshall was appointed by LBJ and Douglas was appointed by FDR. Brennan was a Democrat, appointed by Ike in a misguided attempt at bipartisanship. Eisenhower later stated that his appointment was the biggest mistake in his life.

SINCE THE ROE v WADE DECISION of 1973, REPUBLICAN-APPOINTED JUSTICES HAVE ALWAYS BEEN IN THE MAJORITY BY A MARGIN OF AT LEAST 7-2. Any THINKING person would have to wonder just how many Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices it takes to overturn Roe v. Wade????

Thanks man. Truth hurts.

Roe v. Wade has been upheld by a majority of Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices for the last 35 years which isn’t surprising given the fact that it was a majority of Republican-appointed justices which gave us Roe v. Wade to begin with back in 1973. Six of the seven justices who voted in support of Roe v. Wade were appointed by Republican presidents.

The Republican controlled Congress did absolutely nothing to overturn Roe, even though Article III, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution clearly gives congress the authority to except and/or regulate the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

O’Connor and Kennedy, both appointed by Reagan, have written landmark decisions favoring abortion and gay rights.

Stevens and Souter, nominated by Bush 41, turned out to be liberals (gasp!)

Shortly after John Roberts was nominated, he proclaimed Roe “the settled law of the land”. Not terribly encouraging.

SINCE THE ROE v WADE DECISION of 1973, REPUBLICAN-APPOINTED JUSTICES HAVE ALWAYS BEEN IN THE MAJORITY BY A MARGIN OF AT LEAST 7-2. Any THINKING person would have to wonder just how many Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices it takes to overturn Roe v. Wade????

Because the philosophy and policies endorsed by the Republican party that contradict Catholic teaching are not limited to war, but war is one of the clearest examples.

I’m currently far more comfortable with the Republican fit and the Democratic one.

1) Not sure why you feel you would have to choose. Don’t be duped. The best approach, I think, is to take the entirety of CST seriously and refuse any party loyalty.

2) For someone who is supposedly only somewhat comfortable with the Republilcan party, you are defending them an awful lot and arguing that their positions reflect Catholic teaching. If you’re “far more comfortable” with a party that in fact systemically promotes war, torture, corporate welfare, environmental destruction, etc then I think something is dreadfully wrong. Oppose it all and refuse to choose.

I was thinking of groups such as NOW and Human Rights Campaign when I referred to “radical feminism” and “gay advocacy”. Both are stalwarts of the Democratic party, and neither is anywhere close to being in keeping with Catholic teaching on either issue.

Then why did you say “economic and foreign policy” rather than “war”?

As it happens, I have read a fair amount the Church’s social teaching and just war teaching, and while I don’t think either party is a perfect home for them, I’m currently far more comfortable with the Republican fit and the Democratic one.

“The right to abortion”. OK.

“Radical feminism”. Huh? This sounds like something from the throat of Rush Limbaugh. I would argue that many so-called conservative Catholics are overly-influenced by evangelical theology concerning the submission of wives to husbands on that front, and don’t quite appreciate John Paul’s unique contributions on the ultimate equality of man and woman.

“Gay advocacy”. Again, huh? If you mean laws to protect discrimination against gays, then call me a gay advocate. If you mean supporting civil unions, I will say that the state can do whatever it likes on that ground (as it can with divorce laws that I do not support). If you say marriage should encompass same-sex couples, then I will disgaree. If course, the Democratic party contains shades of every opinion. One more point: the USCCB document does not list opposition to same-sex marriage as one of the “intrinsically evil” list. I would include it among such topics as war and health care, rather than with abortion, euthanasia, and torture.

More fundamentually, the minset that leads a person to support abortion on demand is the same mindset that leads to free market absolutism and to supprt for same-sex marriage. It’s all about the satisfaction of individual wants and needs, never about the needs of society and the common good. It’s Enlighment-era individualism run amuck. It’s about a social contractarian approach to public life. This mindset is prevalent in the ideologies of both major parties. This particular post shows very clearly that the GOP is not what some would like it to be, or claim it to be.

The ones you listed, yes.

I would disagree with you and say that the Republicans have been right on nearly every economic issue, and a great many foreign policy ones.

Then you aren’t very familiar with Catholic social teaching or the Church’s just war tradition. Learn it.

One must engage in some serious political and religious mental gymnastics to truly believe that questions of tax policy and the like are as “life and death” as abortion.

Not talking about tax policy. The major issue I had in mind is war. And that IS just as much a life and death issue as abortion.