"In protecting human life, 'We must begin with a commitment never to
intentionally kill, or collude in the killing, of any innocent human life.'"
Thus says one of the most abused documents of the Administrative
Committee of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. The document, called
Faithful Citizenship, is a useful tool in helping people prepare for the
elections. But like every useful too, it is useful only when used correctly.
Unfortunately, many have misused it.
Some in the Church today are fond of saying that we have to consider
"a wide range of issues" when we vote -- which is true as far as it goes -- but
then go farther and say that all the issues are of equal weight -- which is not
only false, but offensive to common sense.
Take, for example, the "scorecard" that was recently put together by
some Catholic Senators, summarizing their voting record on a variety of issues
and then giving each a score. There's no problem, of course, in reviewing and
summarizing how public officials vote. In fact, the public deserves more of that
information. The big problem with the scorecard, however, is that all the issues
are assigned equal weight, so that no distinction is made between the importance
of banning partial-birth abortion and the regulation of mercury levels in
thermometers.
Faithful Citizenship reflects a wide range of issues, yet does
make some distinctions (though not as effectively as the document issued in 1998
by the entire body of bishops, Living the Gospel of Life, from which, in
fact, it draws the quote we are examining). Faithful Citizenship tells us
where we start: never intentionally kill the innocent. By identifying
this starting point, the document lays out a foundation, it draws an absolute
boundary, it identifies a fundamental principle. Before we consider the many
things we must do to build a just society, we must identify what we can never
do. The claim of innocent human life to protection by society is a claim
without which society could never protect the person's other interests or
fulfill the person's other needs. Being right about those other needs while
being wrong about the starting point is a formula for failure to serve the
common good.
"We must begin with a commitment never to intentionally kill."
With these words the bishops indicate that there is more that comes after the
beginning, just as there is more to be built after the foundation is laid. But
the foundation has to be secure. Considering, for example, the poor, we realize
that any plans for giving them adequate food, housing, health care, and
education always presume that we do not allow a policy of killing them. Any
discussions about what laws promote the best care for the poor assume that
the law protects their lives from deliberate destruction.
"We must begin with a commitment never to intentionally kill."
Laws allowing abortion fail society at the starting gate. If we cannot
protect life, we'll never succeed at enhancing it.
