What’s going on with the Catholic left? Michael Sean Winters drew wide notice for his break with the Obama administration over its contraceptive and abortifacient mandate last week, and many eyebrows were raised when the fiercely liberal Cardinal Mahony of Los Angeles began denouncing the administration for the same reason.
Now Richard Stith (a pro-union, Catholic Democrat who has opposed Republican calls to “repeal and replace” Obamacare) has very reluctantly declared his support for—of all things—right-to-work laws. The reason? Stith can’t bear the way that unions funnel money to pro-abortion candidates.
As a long-time union supporter, I have opposed the proposed law, fearing that unions would become weaker as employees became tempted by economic hardship, especially in these tough times, into disaffiliating in order not to pay their fair share of bargaining costs.
The Catholic bishops have brought up a new issue: employee conscience. They point out that some unions “use their resources to support politicians or political parties that clearly devalue the sanctity of human life or the institution of marriage.” President Obama and the national Democratic Party come readily to mind (even though there are a quite few “Democrats for Life,” like myself, at the grassroots level of the Party). Without right-to-work legislation, some employees are forced to violate their consciences, since the required fees indirectly enable mothers and fathers to turn tragically against their own children, dismembering them in the womb.
My own position has thus changed. If the national Democratic Party became neutral on abortion, or if Indiana unions ceased to support that party, I would oppose right-to-work laws. Until one of those things happens, I reluctantly support the proposed legislation.
This is striking. Stith (whose views I would not conflate with Winters’ or Mahony’s) is a representatives of a tradition of blue-collar, working class, Catholic liberalism. It’s a tattered tradition, sure, and many pro-lifers broke with the party long ago. Yet a Democratic party increasingly strident on what it calls “reproductive health” is alienating even the most loyal hold-outs.
What we’re seeing is a second crack-up of the Catholic left and, perhaps, a new generation of Reagan Democrats. I hope that Republicans looking to capitalize on this disappointment will do so by standing firmly (and consistently) for life.
January 30th, 2012 | 8:41 am
It may be that liberals find it effective to triangulate.
More likely is that we liberals don’t exist in a convenient round-up group for your conservatives to take shots at.
For the record, two things about the retired LA archbishop. You spelled his name wrong. He’s not a liberal, let alone a fierce one. He may well have gotten into a public spat with Mother A, but I consider that an episode of conservative cannibalism, not the culturewar.
As for what the GOP can do to earn my vote, the party itself is hopeless. But I have no problem voting for a principled Republican who actually is pro-life. Unfortunately for them, I have a long memory of New York State’s abortion laws being supported and signed in by the GOP.
As for the president’s recent woes, I also know that many states require what many Catholics have gotten into a snit about. So while I think MSW is on the right track criticizing Mr Obama on this one, I can’t quite bring myself to stand with the more vocal bishops on this. Some elements of conservative Catholicism wouldn’t vote for reelection under any circumstances, and the president’s supporters are far from likely to embrace the candidacy of Neck Paulney.
This all seems like positioning for the 1% … of voters who really are undecided.
January 30th, 2012 | 9:36 am
Todd: The spelling of Mahony’s name has been updated. Also, please note that the post explicitly states that I do not conflate the views of all Catholic Democrats.
January 30th, 2012 | 9:49 am
I’m glad to see that life is becoming a priority for more Catholics. I wonder if I’m right or left. Abortion is a non-negotiable for me and tops the list. And next, Catholic social-economic teaching is very important. While I’ll always vote pro-life, I see no candidate aligned with Catholic thought (doctrine, that is). Unfortunately, Catholics who consider themselves “right” have bought into a capitalist republican card and “left” Catholics have sold themselves to pro-abortion democrats. I am not a right or left Catholic, and I’m not ambidextrous. I’m just Catholic.
January 30th, 2012 | 9:51 am
[...] See Crackup of the Catholic Left. [...]
January 30th, 2012 | 10:57 am
I think that an informed and committed Catholic will have grave problems with both political parties. I grew up in that tradition of liberal Catholicism and still respect it; but the aggressive and sinister secularism of this administration is finally pushing me over the edge. I shall probably vote Republican in the fall for the first time in my 45-years, although if I do so, it will be with the utmost reluctance.
January 30th, 2012 | 12:17 pm
Matthew,
Unlike you, I will not wait in anticipation for the Republican Party to become more “consistently” pro-life, there is, to be blunt, no political advantage to them for doing so. I think it is better to examine both parties with a cold, cynical eye and conclude that neither is worthy of our loyalty, trust or votes. Both parties are essentially money laundering operations and he who pays the piper calls the tune. Neither operates on any kind of consistent or coherent philosophy. The biggest barrier to any kind of meaningful or creative discussion of our political options is the underlying assumption that our two party system is inevitable or fixed in stone. I am not suggesting a multi-party system either. It is past time to question the existence and function of political parties themselves. They are not called for in the Constitution and our founders had a dim view of them. The political parties create and organize coalitions of convenience, but that function can be served by other entities, including the candidates themselves.
Rather than stay away from the polls, people who refuse to vote for either party should write in a protest vote, the simplest being “None of the Above”. If enough people did this, and if it were properly reported, it could have the effect of undermining the mandate any candidate is perceived to have and would expose the weakness of both major parties.
The problem with the Democratic Party is summed up in your report on Richard Stith’s change of heart. Unions have become part of an iron triangle of funding for the party in which for the sake of the coalition their money goes to candidates on the basis of the party’s diktat on “Choice”. I have seen this dynamic play out in a primary campaign where the most staunch lifelong labor candidate was all but stiffed by the unions, with the exception of a few locals, because of his pro-life stance.
But, the Republican Party has its own axis of evil, and its position on the life issues as an organization, setting aside the sincere convictions of many of its officeholders and supporters, is cynical and opportunistic.
I apologize for the rambling nature of this post, but this is a subject I care a lot about. I was once very active in partisan politics and I find the continuation of discussions like this on the basis of the either/or dichotomy of political gamesmanship, which party will pick up whose votes or which party deserves our votes, to be increasingly infuriating. We have to go deeper than that and be prepared to at least in discussion consider more radical (as in the original sense of the word) solutions.
January 30th, 2012 | 2:33 pm
“I hope that Republicans looking to capitalize on this disappointment will do so by standing firmly (and consistently) for life.”
Since they have never done so, the question is academic.
Like real estate, there are only three issues that are important in politics: the ecomony, the ecomony and the economy.
If th economy is deemed “good” the incumbent will be re-elected. If the ecomony is not deeemed “good,” the incumbent will not be re-elected.
Jimmy Carter and G. H. W. Bush are Exhibits A and B. The economy also explains the Clinton and Obama victories.
January 30th, 2012 | 4:12 pm
[...] HHS Mandate “Out of Whack” Monday, January 30, 2012, 4:12 PM Matthew Schmitz I noted this morning that the Obama HHS mandate has contributed to a crumbling of the Catholic left, and [...]
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact