Five Questions I'd Ask Pro-Choice Catholic Politicians

American politics is full of bizarre things which ought not be.  Foremost among them are people who identify themselves as "Catholics" and yet act against the Church on matters of grave importance. 

It is one thing to debate whether a Catholic should support private school vouchers, increases to the capital gains tax, or what constitutes a fair immigration system.  The Church offers some guiding principles but no specific ruling on those.

However, when it comes to the legality of abortion, the Church could not be any more clear.  In his encyclical letter "Laudato Si", Pope Francis said:

"Concern for the protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification of abortion. How can we genuinely teach the importance of concern for other vulnerable beings, however troublesome or inconvenient they may be, if we fail to protect a human embryo, even when its presence is uncomfortable and creates difficulties?" - Laudato Si, 120

And the Catholic Catechism states:

"The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation.  The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority."  - CCC 2273

However, many Catholic politicians, for reasons I dare not speculate upon, insist on supporting the institution of abortion in America.  Their refrain is always the same:

"I personally oppose abortion, but I think the law should allow a woman the right to choose."

Reporters hear those words and nod piously, never following up with hard questions.

So today I want to look at 5 questions I would pose to Pro-Choice Catholic politicians.

The Questions:

Question 1: "You have said publicly that you are 'personally opposed' to abortion.  Why are you 'personally opposed' to abortion?"

There is only one reason to be opposed to abortion - because you know abortion ends the life of an innocent living human being.  If it didn't, the operation would carry the same moral weight as having a tumor removed.

So first I'd want the politician to call abortion by its proper name.  I want him to identify what about it makes him so uncomfortable.

Question 2: "If you are 'personally opposed' because the pre-birth child is a real human life, why do you take the position of publicly advocating -against- their human rights?"

Next I would want to point out that his "Pro-Choice" position is not a morally neutral stance. Logically inseparable from supporting that "right to choose" is opposing the legal rights of pre-birth babies.   

So if he really thinks they are humans, why does he campaign to protect an institution which kills them by the millions?   

Question 3: "Suppose you were alive at the dawn of the industrial revolution - back before serious labor laws existed.  How would you respond to a person who said he is 'personally opposed' to child labor, but opposes child labor laws and thinks companies should have the option to employ them in dangerous conditions?"

Sometimes changing the subject can bring things into focus.  A person who is "pro-choice" in regard to child labor, spousal abuse, or slavery would never be able to show his face in public.  

We instantly recognize how unacceptable it is to take a "pro-choice" stance on other grave violations of human dignity.  If the politician really thinks the pre-born are humans, why does he think his position on abortion is different?  

Question 4: "Pope Francis and the Catholic Catechism both teach that recognizing the human rights of pre-born babies in law is a necessary precondition for a just and humane society. Do you agree with that teaching of your Church?"

Many Catholic politicians try to quarantine the Church's teaching on abortion into the realm of private morality.  

In this question I would point out that the Church frames its teaching on the sanctity of life as a matter of human rights - and therefore proper matter for legislation.  It is no different from having laws against rape, murder, and theft.

I would want the politician to decide and declare whether he dissents from that teaching.

Question 5: "When converts come into the Catholic Church, they must publicly proclaim that they believe all the Church teaches to be revealed by God.  Would you be able to make that profession?"

Being Catholic is not an ethnicity.  No, it involves believing certain things.  Among those things is the identity of the Church as the visible institution founded by Jesus Christ to teach all generations under the protection of the Holy Spirit.  

This is why we cannot pick and choose which doctrines to believe.  Because as soon as you say,  "The Church is wrong here", you have denied something far greater than that one doctrine.  

So with this question I'm basically asking: 

 "You say your Catholic identity is important to you.  Well... suppose you weren't born into the Catholic Church.  Believing what you do about abortion, would you be able to join it?"  

To What End?

In the end the purpose of my interview would be threefold.

First, I would want the public to see how shallow the Pro-Choice slogans are when subjected to serious cross-examination.  Advocating for the legality of abortion - whether done by a Catholic or not - is not a neutral position.

Second, these politicians are a major source of scandal to Catholics and non-Catholics alike.  People look to them and say:

"If the Church lets him be Pro-Choice, I guess that's an acceptable position for a Catholic to take."  

I would want to make it clear this isn't the case.

Lastly, I'd hope there is some value for the politician himself.  It is easy to rationalize things in the privacy of our own mind.  But having to say some of these things aloud would hopefully awaken something in his conscience.  Might lead him to say, "How did I get here?" 

A Catholic who publicly defends the legality of abortion is indeed a long way from home...

... but he is only one good Confession away from being a Saint.