Holy Homework: How Catholics Vote

| 11/1/2024

By: Father Bob Pagliari, C.SS.R., PH.D.

As we make our way to vote, let’s recite the Pledge of Allegiance and offer a prayer of gratitude to God for true democracy, which includes human dignity, human equality, and the common good, including what’s good for unborn citizens

Father Robert Pagliari, C.Ss.R., Ph.D., author of "Holy Homework."
Father Robert Pagliari, C.Ss.R., Ph.D., author of "Holy Homework."

This is not a summary report on the number of Catholics who vote in various elections nor about which candidates or propositions they favor. This is an exposé of how Americans, especially Catholic Americans, receive the information they need before casting their ballot.

Given the controversial issues under debate at present, we need to be assured that the material set before us is credible and free from bias, bluffing, and bullying.

According to renowned professor of Catholic Ethics, Dr. Matthew R. Petrusek, for true democracy to exist, it must contain at least three elements: human dignity, human equality, and an objective understanding of the common good. 

A fine example in the upcoming elections for New York State is Ballot Proposal # 1. In essence, this proposal would permit abortion on demand up to the moment of birth. Obviously, it would be ludicrous to claim that killing an unborn child can in any way be considered a method of promoting dignity, equality, or the common good. Snuffing out the life of a human being before that person can take a breath is hardly a sane way to promote liberty and justice for all. On the contrary, wherever abortion is legal, democracy, according to Petrusek’s criteria, cannot exist in the truest sense of the word.  Any intelligent use of logic would confirm this. 

However, those who promote abortion rarely use logical appeals. Instead, they rely heavily on emotional appeals, hoping to gain a majority vote to win their crusade to legalize the extermination of unborn citizens. What they consider logical reasons are simply emotional appeals in disguise which are easily refuted by facts. Here are four of their most-cited claims with concrete counterarguments that cannot be denied:

Claim # 1: The pregnancy exists within the woman’s body and since it is her body, she can do with it as she pleases.

Counter Claim # 1: This is biological ignorance. The DNA of the infant in the womb is different than the DNA of the mother. In other words, the unborn child’s body is NOT the woman’s body but a separate, unique body. Since it is not “her body” she cannot “do with it as she pleases” but must respect the fact that this is a separate and unique individual with the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness!

Claim # 2:  The unborn child is just another organ.

Counter Claim # 2: This is nutritional nonsense. All of the organs in the human body are designed to help us by contributing in some way to our health and proper functioning. An infant in the womb is not a contributing organ. Quite the contrary.  In this symbiotic relationship, the child is a consummate “taker.” Only the mother is a “giver” and all the true “organs” in her body comply accordingly. They are designed to give her what she and her growing child need.

Claim # 3: The unborn child is a permanent obstacle that can be removed.

Counter Claim # 3: The unborn child is a temporary, not a permanent resident in the mother’s womb. Humans have neither the desire nor the capacity to live inside their mother forever. The rental agreement is set for nine months.

Claim # 4: The unborn child is not a person.  

Counter Claim # 4: The American Convention on Human Rights, which envisions the fetal right to life from the moment of conception, effectively declares the fetus a person.  This is why pregnant women have always been prohibited from being executed because that would be tantamount to killing two people.  Likewise, in 2004 Congress passed the law that a violent assault committed against a pregnant woman is a crime against two victims: the woman and the fetus she carries.  Lastly, under existing child abuse statutes, women can be arrested and criminally prosecuted for allegedly bringing about harm to a child in-utero through their harmful conduct during pregnancy—like using illicit drugs.  The fact that an in-utero child can benefit from legal rights assumes that the child must be a person. 

Thankfully, the cardinal and bishops who pastor the eight dioceses in New York State have clarified for Catholic voters exactly what Proposal 1 entails and how deceitfully it is written to hoodwink the voting process and derail true democracy in the United States in general and in New York State in particular. 

Holy Homework:

As we make our way to vote on November 5, let’s recite the Pledge of Allegiance and offer a prayer of gratitude to God for true democracy, which includes human dignity, human equality, and the common good, including what’s good for unborn citizens. 

Comments may be sent to FatherBobPagliari@Yahoo.com

The role is intended to represent the U.S. government's positions on many issues to the Holy See in its capacity as a nation-state in diplomatic efforts.

By:

Our Sunday Visitor

| 12/21/2024

01:17
In his video today, Cardinal Dolan recalls his experience leaving the conclave after the election of Pope Francis and learning that his grand-nephew had been born, and the excitement of anticipating the birth of the baby at Bethlehem.

By:

Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan

| 12/21/2024

A Massachusetts native and respected journalist, Father Malone entered Jesuit formation in 2002 and was ordained in 2012.

By:

Our Sunday Visitor

| 12/21/2024