Catholics and Campaign 2008

By Joe Feuerherd
[Excerpeted from the New York Times, Feb. 24, 2008]

Catholic bishops in 1980 were sharply critical of U.S. support for authoritarian governments in Central America. In 1985, they approved a pastoral letter that included a harsh critique of U.S.-style capitalism. But by 2004, war, peace and economic injustice had become largely afterthoughts.

Bishop Michael Sheridan of Colorado Springs spoke for many of his peers when he wrote in a pastoral letter that the "right to life" is an "issue that trumps all other issues." The death penalty, immigration, the Iraq war, health care and other social justice issues -- these fall into the realm of "prudential judgment," areas where Catholics of goodwill, say the bishops, can disagree. This, naturally enough, provides convenient cover for Catholic candidates who support the war, think the death penalty should be expanded, would leave millions uninsured and oppose immigration reform.

In the key swing state of Ohio in 2004, bishops vigorously supported an anti-same-sex marriage amendment to the state constitution, which helped drive Republican voters to the polls. Bush won 55 percent of the Catholic vote in the Buckeye State, up from 50 percent in 2000 and enough to provide his margin of victory. To Catholics like me who oppose liberal abortion laws, but also think that other issues -- war or peace, health care, just wages, immigration, affordable housing, torture -- actually matter, the idea that abortion trumps everything, all the time, no matter what, is both bad religion and bad civics.

True to my faith, I'll vote for the candidate who offers the best hope of ending an unjust war, who promotes human dignity through universal health care and immigration reform, and whose policies strengthen families and provide alternatives to those in desperate situations.

Joe Feuerherd was Washington correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter in 2004.