- Feb 5, 2002
- 166,616
- 56,250
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Whatever happened to discrimination? When I was growing up, which really wasn’t all that long ago, we were pretty good at it. People were either fat or thin, tall or short, male or female, pregnant or not pregnant, dead or alive, and Catholic or non-Catholic.
The truth is, it’s still that way. We do not live in Schrödinger’s box with a cat and a flask of acid, though sometimes one wonders if that would be preferable.
In June 2022 I joined Twitter, and through it discovered the ultimate oxymoron: “Catholics for Choice”. I thought this must be some kind of joke that no one would ever take seriously, but then I came across this article in The Guardian called “Pro-choice Catholics fight to seize the narrative from the religious right”. What next? Pro-alcohol Muslims? Pro-Pork Jews?
Catholicism teaches that “human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognised as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life” (CCC2270).
Catholics are either Catholic or not. No one has to be a Catholic, but to identify as one you actually have to believe Catholicism is true.
To identify as a pro-choice Catholic just doesn’t work. These positions are logically incoherent and mutually exclusive. In reality we inevitably bump up against the fact that one thing precludes another. If I can’t sing, I can’t be an opera singer. If I’m blind, I can’t be a pilot. If I engage in only homosexual acts, I can’t have a baby.
But as we slip deeper into an unreality brought about by increasingly intelligent but artificial ways of getting what we want, people struggle to discriminate between that which the natural law reveals as true and that which is false.
Continued below.
The truth is, it’s still that way. We do not live in Schrödinger’s box with a cat and a flask of acid, though sometimes one wonders if that would be preferable.
In June 2022 I joined Twitter, and through it discovered the ultimate oxymoron: “Catholics for Choice”. I thought this must be some kind of joke that no one would ever take seriously, but then I came across this article in The Guardian called “Pro-choice Catholics fight to seize the narrative from the religious right”. What next? Pro-alcohol Muslims? Pro-Pork Jews?
Catholicism teaches that “human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognised as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life” (CCC2270).
Catholics are either Catholic or not. No one has to be a Catholic, but to identify as one you actually have to believe Catholicism is true.
To identify as a pro-choice Catholic just doesn’t work. These positions are logically incoherent and mutually exclusive. In reality we inevitably bump up against the fact that one thing precludes another. If I can’t sing, I can’t be an opera singer. If I’m blind, I can’t be a pilot. If I engage in only homosexual acts, I can’t have a baby.
But as we slip deeper into an unreality brought about by increasingly intelligent but artificial ways of getting what we want, people struggle to discriminate between that which the natural law reveals as true and that which is false.
Continued below.
