God is Not a Democrat
By Keith A. Fournier
© Third millennium, LLC
Several weeks ago, I wrote an article entitled "God is Not a Republican". It generated a lot of "heat". I received the first responses from people who did not even read the article. So incensed with the title, they immediately dismissed me as being a Democrat. Which, most assuredly I am not! I am writing this follow up article as a private citizen. I am not writing on behalf of any organization of which I am a part, nor with any title or indication that it is an "official" position. At the end, I will tell you who I am voting for.
The second paragraph of the original article clarified the title and the topic in these words "God is not a Democrat either. Nor is He a member of the Constitution Party, the Libertarian party... or any of a growing number of political "alternatives" that reflect a growing dissatisfaction with both major political parties."
Political parties are our creation, not His. He has called us into this world and given us the capacity to exercise our freedom. We make our choices and in those choices we change ourselves, as well as the world around us, for better or for worse. One of our choices is how we choose to govern ourselves and whether we will do so for the common good. We must make our political decisions according to a hierarchy of values.
We will soon elect the next President of the United States. This is an election of particular importance for faithful Christians because of the issues that most of us hold as vital to a truly just and humane society.
Over the years I have come to group those issues in categories around what I call "four pillars of social participation"; the dignity of every human life (from conception through to natural death), the primacy of true marriage and family (as the first vital cell of all civil society as well as the first church, first government, first school, first economy and first mediating institution); authentic and responsible human and religious freedom; and our obligations in solidarity with all the poor and the needy.
I have worked for decades to encourage Christians, indeed all people of faith and good will, to build a more just and human society around these four pillars. I have participated in, and helped to build, movements and associations oriented toward this vital work because I have long believed and proclaimed that my faith compels me to live a unity of life. I reject the so-called "private/public" dichotomy of some Catholics and other Christians in public life as heresy.
My faith is profoundly personal but it is also radically and fundamentally public. It is not a coat that I put on when I enter a Church building but rather a center from which I live and a lens through which I view all of human and social existence. There simply are objective moral truths that must guide truly human behavior and help to inform any authentically free and just social community life. There are fundamental human rights, not conferred by a government nor taken away by a Court.
For example, the position I hold on the right to life and the dignity of every human life at every age and stage is NOT, in the first instance, a "religious" position; it is a human rights position and I know that it must become the polestar of all good public policy. Without the right to life and the freedom to be born, as well as the further right to live a full life and die a natural death, unimpeded by euthanasia, passive or active, there simply are no other rights or human freedoms. Our entire system of rights is at risk.
If freedom becomes reduced to a notion of doing whatever one "chooses", including the intentional killing of children in the womb, the elderly, the "dependent"... it has been gutted from its true meaning and reduced to some "right" to exercise a raw power over others. This counterfeit definition of "choice" as a right to do what is wrong will not promote true freedom. It will inevitably lead to a new and profane form of slavery.
Like most folks, I have tried to use my prudential judgment in exercising a treasured right, the right to vote as an American citizen. I believe that there is a hierarchy of values that must be applied in the application of this kind of judgment. I have sought to order the issues in deciding for whom I would vote. Of course, I will do so once again this vital election year.
To any political "experts" reading this article, I am exactly the kind of voter who will help to determine this election. I write this article as I wrote the last one to give some insights into the issues that will determine my vote. Maybe the so-called "experts" will pay attention.
I officially left the party called Democratic years ago. The last Democrat that I enthusiastically supported was Governor Bob Casey. I could not be associated with a party that claimed to care for the poor and failed to hear the cry of the "poorest of the poor" children in the womb. Though I never "officially" switched my registration, I have been "lumped" with the other major party called "Republican." I have seriously considered trying to launch a new party, one that is pro-life, pro-family, pro-freedom, pro-peace and pro-poor. I am leaning heavily in that direction in the future if trends in both major political parties continue.
However, that is the future, this is now.
I am whole life, pro-life. I absolutely oppose the taking of innocent human life in the first home of the entire human race, the womb. Science has confirmed what our conscience has long known; the child in the womb is out neighbor. It is always and everywhere intrinsically evil to take innocent human life. It is also intrinsically evil to "manufacture" human embryonic life in order to then kill that life for spare parts.
I oppose capital punishment, though on different moral grounds. It is no longer defensible in the West because it is no longer necessary to protect or preserve the common good. Bloodless means are available to protect society and "punish" the criminal. Also, there is simply no doubt that mistakes have been made and we have executed the innocent. Mercy should trump justice. Vengeance is never ours. However, capital punishment is not intrinsically evil. In the current race both candidates support capital punishment.
Marriage must be defended and protected from the current assault against the institution for the sake of the common good of civil society. Marriage is what it is and we all know it. There is a word used in Philosophical and theological discourse to speak about the nature of things. It is the word "ontology". It refers to the essence of something. There is an "ontology" to marriage. A cabbage is not a rock. A dog is not a human person. Co-habiting homosexual couples are not a marriage and should not be called one by judicial fiat.
Homosexual relationships and the sexual acts accompanying such relationships cannot ever constitute a marriage. They are not capable of being open to the fullness of the love that is at the foundation of the unitive nature of marriage and for which even our bodies are constituted; that is the total gift of self to the other in faithful, lifelong love. Nor can such sexual acts, or the relationships formed around them, ever be procreative, open to new life in children. Social groupings built on such relationships are also not families.
There is an intense effort underway to categorize those who still support this objective reality as uncaring, bigoted or antiquated. We are not. Marriage and the family founded upon it insure the future of freedom. Redefining marriage and family will not help anyone, including those who are self defined homosexuals. It is also destructive of the social order. Marriage and the family built upon it is the solid foundation of civil society. It is the first vital cell of that society.
Of course all persons must be treated with human dignity and not be discriminated against and that includes people who struggle with the disorder of homosexuality. However, there are other ways to protect against discrimination than the current efforts to redefine the fundamental social institution of marriage, the defining cornerstone of our social order. To destroy marriage under the guise of "tolerance" is dangerous and corrosive to the common good and horribly intolerant. In the current election, one candidate fully supports marriage as only between a man and a woman and has the courage to lead the only process that can stop the growing cultural revolution that seeks to reorder society.
I opposed the pre-emptive war in Iraq. I rejected then- and still reject - any notion of a "pre-emptive" war. Like all Americans, I believe that prudence and justice now require that we assist the people of Iraq in their hour of great need. I do not see all that much difference between the two major parties on how we must act going forward in Iraq. In fact, a word to probably well intended Republicans; repeatedly telling people like me that one candidate opposed the war in Vietnam, as if that fact would make people like me feel more negatively disposed to him simply because of that, is not effective. I opposed that war also! In fact, I marched in Washington against the Vietnam War. War is always horrible and must be strictly evaluated according to an authentic application of the principles of the "just war" analysis. I noted that President Bush is now acknowledging that those who opposed the war should still vote for him given the host of other vital issues.
I also had several responses from "conservatives" maintaining that there is no health care crisis. Nonsense! I am deeply concerned that in the wealthiest Nation on earth we still have not solved the real health care crisis. I dread the idea of a "nationalized" solution because big Government has not proven itself to be very efficient nor is it very good at compassion and care. That is part of why I also support the "faith based" and community initiative of the current administration as a part of fulfilling our national obligation to the poor. We MUST now find the creative solutions to providing health care for all Americans. In my opinion, neither candidate has offered real solutions. The "market" will not solve this crisis without leadership. Nor will same old, same old big government efforts that are inefficient and usually ineffective.
Churches and religious institutions ARE good at compassion and care and need to be seen as partners in solidarity! The principle of subsidiarity which holds that government is best when it is closest to those being governed and the principle of solidarity that reminds us of our obligations to one another and that we are our "brothers (and sisters) keeper" have found a wonderful meeting place in this great new (really quite old) initiative. It is fresh, creative public policy. One candidate has championed this new model and he has predicated his entire social policy around opening up the delivery of compassion and care to the religious and mission driven community along with all other social providers on an equal footing.
I have an ever increasing disdain for an "economism" that somehow posits "freedom" as best advanced through a kind of economic Darwinism. Freedom is a good of the person. Our market economy is a tremendous vehicle for freedom but it must always be placed at the service of the person, the family and the common good. We simply MUST hear the cry of the poor! Expanding economic participation to all is a vital part of making sure that "free" is the operative description before the phrase market economy! That must be true in our international economic relationships as well. Both candidates are speaking to these concerns.
You can see just from what I have written thus far, that I am neither Republican nor Democrat, neither "liberal" nor "conservative." I am, however, very politically engaged. In fact, I watched much of the convention in Boston. I will watch much of the one in New York as well. I find it particularly intriguing that of the main speakers, beside the President, the "pro-life" speakers are in the minority. In fact, one of the few pro-life speakers is Gov. Zell Miller, a Democrat. Yet at the democratic convention, he would not have been allowed to even speak.
I am not ready to join any of the current "Third Party" efforts. I feel that it will throw away my vote at this time. I also cannot "opt" to "not vote" -as a growing number of people whom I respect are choosing to do.
I will vote. Here is why and how.
The next occupant of the Whitehouse will choose at least three Supreme Court Justices. That choice will determine whether the current "culture of death" hiding under the profane precedent of Roe v Wade will take another generation of our children as it continues to expand the culture of death. I cannot be a party to such an evil.
The next President will provide the moral leadership so desperately needed to prevent new cultural revolutionaries from eliminating marriage and family from its favored social status by equalizing homosexual and heterosexual relationships outside of marriage and using the power of the State to enforce this new order. I must vote for the man who will defend the truth that marriage is a lifelong union between one man and one woman.
The next President will have an opportunity to solve the health care crisis, expand economic opportunity, bring our troops home from Iraq with honor and dignity and continue to open up our market, and our National embrace to the poor in all of their manifestations.
This is an important election. I have weighed the issues according to a hierarchy. Without the recognition of the dignity of every human life from conception to natural death the entire system of rights is threatened. Without the recognition of the right to life, there are no other rights. Without the freedom to be born, there are no other freedoms. Without recognition of the first cell of society, marriage and the family built upon it, and its full protection, the entire social order is threatened.
I am not happy with the war in its inception or its continued prosecution. I am deeply concerned that we do not hear the "cry of the poor" and that we have not given serious consideration of the inequities in our workforce with a genuine concern for a truly just "family wage" I worry that we have not even begun to consider the need to make health care available to all. I worry about many, many other issues and concerns that some of my "conservative" friends do not think are real issues. They are.
However, I will vote for George Bush. I simply could not in conscience vote for John Kerry.
However, I still insist that God is neither Republican nor Democrat and neither am I.
Deacon Keith Fournier is a married Roman Catholic Deacon of the Diocese of Richmond, who also serves the Melkite Greek Catholic Church with approval. He is a human rights lawyer and a graduate of the John Paul II Institute of the Lateran University, Franciscan University of Steubenville and the University Of Pittsburgh School Of Law. He is the founder and Thomas More Fellow of the Common Good Movement. The author of seven books, he recently wrote "The Prayer of Mary: Living the Surrendered Life" which will be released before Christmas.
http://www.catholic.org CA, US
Deacon Keith Fournier - Author, 661 869-1000
God, Politics, Vote, YCV, Republican, Democrat, Life, Dignity
More Catholic PRWire
Showing 1 - 50 of 4,718
A Recession Antidote
Monaco & The Vatican: Monaco's Grace Kelly Exhibit to Rome--A Review of Monegasque-Holy See Diplomatic History
Dna. Maria St. Catherine Sharpe, t.o.s.m., T.O.SS.T.
A Royal Betrayal: Catholic Monaco Liberalizes Abortion
Dna. Maria St.Catherine De Grace Sharpe, t.o.s.m., T.O.SS.T.
Embrace every moment as sacred time
Mary Regina Morrell
Letting go is simple wisdom with divine potential
Mary Regina Morrell
Father Lombardi's Address on Catholic Media
Pope's Words to Pontifical Latin American College
Prelate: Genetics Needs a Conscience
State Aid for Catholic Schools: Help or Hindrance?
Scorsese Planning Movie on Japanese Martyrs
2 Nuns Kidnapped in Kenya Set Free
Holy See-Israel Negotiation Moves Forward
Franchising to Evangelize
Catholics Decry Anti-Christianity in Israel
Pope and Gordon Brown Meet About Development Aid
Pontiff Backs Latin America's Continental Mission
Cardinal Warns Against Anti-Catholic Education
Three words to a deeper faith
Relections for Lent 2009
Wisdom lies beyond the surface of life
Mary Regina Morrell
World Food Program Director on Lent
Pope's Lenten Message for 2009
Keeping a Lid on Permissiveness
Glimpse of Me
The 3 stages of life
Sex and the Married Woman
A Catholic Woman Returns to the Church
Modernity & Morality
Just a Minute
Catholic identity ... triumphant reemergence!
Edging God Out
Burying a St. Joseph Statue
George Bush Speaks on Papal Visit
Sometimes moving forward means moving the canoe
Mary Regina Morrell
Easter... A Way of Life
Papal initiative...peace and harmony!
Proclaim the mysteries of the Resurrection!
Jerusalem Patriarch's Easter Message
Good Friday Sermon of Father Cantalamessa
Papal Address at the End of the Way of the Cross
Cardinal Zen's Meditations for Via Crucis
Interview With Vatican Aide on Jewish-Catholic Relations
Pope Benedict XVI On the Easter Triduum
by Catholic Online
- Daily Reading for Tuesday, March 28th, 2017 HD Video
- Daily Readings for Saturday, March 25, 2017
- 'Living Lent': Monday of the Fourth Week of Lent - Day 27
- 'Living Lent': Saturday of the Third Week of Lent - Day 25
- St. Dismas: Saint of the Day for Saturday, March 25, 2017
- Daily Reading for Sunday, March 26th, 2017 HD Video
- 'Living Lent': Sunday of the Fourth Week of Lent - Day 26
- Daily Reading for Monday, March 27th, 2017 HD
- Adorable girl captured stealing Pope Francis' hat in hilarious footage HD
- Cause of cancer detected from unexpected and unpreventable element HD
- Daily Reading for Saturday, March 25th, 2017 HD
Copyright 2017 Catholic Online. All materials contained on this site, whether written, audible or visual are the exclusive property of Catholic Online and are protected under U.S. and International copyright laws, © Copyright 2017 Catholic Online. Any unauthorized use, without prior written consent of Catholic Online is strictly forbidden and prohibited.