Friday, October 2, 2020

Trump and Biden clash over Barrett nomination, abortion, in fiery debate September 30, 2020 CNA Daily News News Briefs

Trump and Biden clash over Barrett nomination, abortion, in fiery debate

September 30, 2020 CNA Daily News News Briefs 0Print

CNA Staff, Sep 30, 2020 / 09:00 am (CNA).- The future of Roe v. Wade and the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court were raised in Tuesday night’s presidential debate between President Donald Trump and former vice president Joe Biden.

While the 90-minute debate, held in Cleveland, Ohio, was marked by fiery exchanges from both candidates, with frequent interruptions during answers, both presidential candidates did offer some remarks on abortion and the Supreme Court.

Moderator Chris Wallace asked the candidates about Trump’s recent nomination of Judge Barrett to the Supreme Court, and for their thoughts about how Barrett might change the balance of the court.

Trump, who answered first, said that Barrett was a “phenomenal nominee” who had the support of “very liberal people from Notre Dame and other places.” Barrett, said Trump, is “going to be fantastic.”

“She’s going to be as good as anybody that has served on that court,” said Trump. The president defended his nomination of the judge during an election year, which has been criticized by Democratic lawmakers, who contrast the nomination with the Senate’s 2016 refusal to have a hearing on the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to the court. Trump said that the Republican Party controls both the Senate and the presidency and therefore has the votes to confirm his nominee. In 2016, under President Barack Obama, the Democratic Party did not have the votes in the Senate to move forward with the confirmation process.

“They had Merrick Garland, but the problem is they didn’t have the election so they were stopped,” said Trump. “And probably that would happen in reverse, also. Definitely would happen in reverse.”

Trump added that he was elected to serve as president for four years, not three years, and had the right to fill vacancies in the Supreme Court any time they arose during his four-year term.

Biden said that the Senate should “wait” when it comes to confirming Barrett to the Supreme Court, saying that “The American people have a right to have a say in who the Supreme Court nominee is and that say occurs when they vote for United States senators and when they vote for the president of the United States.”

“They’re not going to get that chance now because we’re in the middle of an election already,” said Biden, noting that many people have already cast their votes.

Biden was also asked if, should he be elected, he would support efforts to add justices to the Supreme Court beyond the nine now prescribed by law. Biden declined repeatedly to answer the question.

Biden said that the Affordable Care Act, legislation that was passed while he was serving as vice president, was at stake due to Barrett’s potential presence on the court.

“And the justice–I’m not opposed to the justice–she seems like a very fine person,” said Biden. “But she’s written, before she went on the bench, which is her right, that she thinks that the Affordable Care Act is not constitutional. The other thing that’s on the court, and if it’s struck down, what happens? Women’s rights are fundamentally changed.”

The former vice president, a Catholic and strong supporter of expanded access to abortion, also suggested that abortion rights could be at risk if Barrett is confirmed to the Supreme Court.

“The point is that the president also is opposed to Roe v. Wade,” said Biden. “That’s on the ballot as well and the court, in the court, and so that’s also at stake right now.”

Trump pushed back at the apparent notion that overturning the Roe v. Wade decision was on the ballot this November, saying that “it’s not on the ballot.”

“There’s nothing happening there,” Trump said, referring apparently to the issue of abortion at the Supreme Court. Trump did not elaborate.

Wallace said the conversation would eventually return to Roe v. Wade, but the topic was not again raised during the debate.

If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.

Pope Francis recognizes miracle attributed to Italian laywoman who died in 1997 September 30, 2020 CNA Daily News News Briefs

Pope Francis recognizes miracle attributed to Italian laywoman who died in 1997

September 30, 2020 CNA Daily News News Briefs 1Print

Vatican City, Sep 30, 2020 / 10:00 am (CNA).- Pope Francis advanced the sainthood cause Tuesday of an Italian woman who died in 1997 after touching the lives of thousands of people despite suffering from progressive paralysis.

The pope authorized the Congregation for the Causes of Saints Sept. 29 to promulgate a decree recognizing a miracle attributed to Gaetana “Nuccia” Tolomeo, paving the way for her beatification.

He also authorized decrees relating to four priests killed during the Spanish Civil War and two founders of religious orders.

This was the first time that the Congregation for the Causes of Saints had promulgated decrees since its prefect, Cardinal Angelo Becciu, resigned Sept. 24.

Gaetana Tolomeo was born on April 10, 1936, in Catanzaro, the capital of the Calabria region of Italy. Known to all as “Nuccia,” she was confined to a bed or a chair for the 60 years of her life.

She devoted her life to prayer, especially the rosary, which she held at all times. She began to attract visitors, including priests, nuns, and lay people, who sought her advice.

In 1994, she started to appear as a guest on a local radio station, using the opportunity to proclaim the Gospel and reach out to the imprisoned, prostitutes, drug addicts, and families in crisis.

According to an Italian website dedicated to her cause, two months before her death on January 24, 1997, she summed up her life in a message to young people.

She said: “I am Nuccia, I am 60 years old, all spent on a bed; my body is twisted, in everything I must depend on others, but my spirit has remained young. The secret of my youth and my joy of living is Jesus. Alleluia!”

In addition to the miracle attributed to Tolomeo’s intercession, the pope recognized the martyrdom of Fr. Francesco Cástor Sojo López and three companions. The four priests, belonging to the Diocesan Laborer Priests of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, were killed “in odium fidei,” or in hatred of the faith, between 1936 and 1938. Following the decree, they may now be beatified.

The pope also approved the heroic virtues of Mother Francisca Pascual Domenech (1833-1903), the Spanish founder of the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate, and of Mother María Dolores Segarra Gestoso (1921-1959), Spanish founder of the Missionaries of Christ the Priest.

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.

Will 2020 mark the turning point on abortion? The scene for 2020 presidential abortion politics was set in 2019 concerning the issue of infanticide in the new abortion legislation codifying Roe/Bolton and enacted in the state of New York and strongly promoted in Virginia.

Will 2020 mark the turning point on abortion?

The scene for 2020 presidential abortion politics was set in 2019 concerning the issue of infanticide in the new abortion legislation codifying Roe/Bolton and enacted in the state of New York and strongly promoted in Virginia.

September 30, 2020 Thomas R. Ascik The Dispatch 14Print

abortion_weigel_apr2018 — March for Life participants and counter-protesters hold signs in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, in 2018. (CNS photo/Peter Lockley)

In the last two years, abortion as a public issue has changed in at least four ways. First, the formerly abortion-should-be-safe-and-rare Democratic party culminated recent years of expanding its abortion advocacy by establishing abortion as fundamental and declaring that Roe v. Wade should be codified into federal law, Second, Catholic Joe Biden, the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate, and, thus, the current leader of the Party, likewise became aggressive in his support of abortion. Third, an American Catholic cardinal criticized one-issue voting and said that it was morally acceptable for Catholics to vote for Joe Biden. Fourth, the actions of Virginia Governor Northam and especially New York Catholic Governor Cuomo caused abortion-as-infanticide to be publicly discussed for the first time.

All or almost all of the twelve or so Democratic candidates for president were strongly supportive of essentially unrestricted abortion. According to its 2020 party platform, the Democratic Party believes “unequivocally” in “safe and legal abortion.” Democrats will “overturn federal and state laws” that limit abortion, and will “respect and enforce” Roe v. Wadeas a “foundational precedent.” Joe Biden has said that he will support codifying Roe into federal law and repealing the forty-year-old Hyde Amendment prohibiting federal funding of abortion. On August 9, Biden released a campaign promotion celebrating his Catholic upbringing and featuring his meeting with Pope Francis together with a video of him with Francis.

Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, a Francis appointment who has downplayed abortion as a decisive issue, stated recently: “I think that a person in good conscience could vote for Mr. Biden,” adding, “I, frankly, in my own way of thinking have a more difficult time with the other option.” Tobin later insisted he was not endorsing Biden, but he also wouldn’t state that a Catholic in good conscience could vote for Mr. Trump.

In an important way, the scene for 2020 presidential abortion politics was set in 2019 concerning the issue of infanticide in the new abortion legislation codifying Roe/Bolton and enacted in the state of New York and strongly promoted in Virginia. Governor Cuomo, describing himself as a person with “Roman Catholic values” and a “former altar boy,” could not have been further away from the old-style Catholic politicians’ soft-pedaling of their position on abortion. He was an open, aggressive, and unapologetic proponent of the bill of the new state law law legalizing abortion throughout the nine months of pregnancy. In a New York Times op-ed on February 6, 2019, he criticized Cardinal Dolan by name and the Catholic Church as “anti-choice” and pointed out that recent polls in New York showed that “59 percent” of Catholic New Yorkers support abortion. While saying that his “Roman Catholic values” are his “personal values,” he did not say that he was personally opposed to abortion.

The next day in the Wall Street Journal, Dolan, in an op-ed that was mostly about the Dred Scott decision, did describe the “grisly” details of the new legislation but mentioned Cuomo only once by name and did not criticize him personally. Instead, in a conciliatory manner, he talked about how “left and right” can “work together” about adoption and alternatives to abortion. His office also issued a statement specifically rejecting excommunication as “not an appropriate response.” So, who had the greater public impact, Cuomo or Dolan?

In his acts and words, Andrew Cuomo has now broadened the legacy and consequences of the speech of his father, former New York governor, Mario Cuomo, delivered at Notre Dame University on September 13, 1984. That high-profile speech — attended and promoted by Notre Dame president Fr. Theodore Hesburgh — established the moral basis for being personally opposed to abortion and justified past Catholic politicians’ stances while establishing the talking points for future Catholic politicians. Mario Cuomo said that Catholics should not regard abortion as of “preemptive significance” or as an “exclusive litmus test” in public advocacy and in the law.

Indeed, beginning in 1983, Cardinal Bernardin, taking over the phrases “consistent ethic of life” and “seamless garment” that had initially been proposed by others, expropriated the word “life” to mean anything human. He later authored a book entitled The Seamless Garment. Bernardin established the more or less predominant Catholic position continuing to this day using the term “life” as an abstract technique of labeling nearly any preferred issue as a pro-life issue. Its primary effect has allowed for the ignoring or downplaying of abortion. Now, four decades later and continuing to the present day, many Catholic politicians have justified themselves as Catholics and as pro-life by mentioning every issue but abortion.

We are now well beyond that. Catholic Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, third in the line of succession to the Presidency and the most powerful woman in America, declared in August that the House of Representatives will no longer agree to the Hyde Amendment prohibiting federal funding for abortion. And one year ago, she spoke of her “privilege” to deliver a speech to the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL).

The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, passed by the Congress in 1994, prohibits the use of physical force and threats at abortion clinics. With federal prosecutions and their criminal penalties, it effectively ended what had been a growing “civil disobedience” and “direct action” movement at the clinics themselves. If the nine-months-of-abortion of Roe/Bolton is enacted into a federal statute, as the Democrats have promised to do, it will not only cause the overturning of all state laws not in compliance, it will also make “sidewalk counseling” a federal matter to be investigated by federal agents.

Is the Cuomo family, including son and brother Chris (“reproductive rights”), the first family of Catholic public officials and persons? And have they had more influence on the Catholic response to abortion than the American bishops?

The fundamental problem here is that there is no Catholic “position” on abortion. Nor is there any such position by evangelical Christians and several Protestant churches. Instead, it is simply the Fifth Commandment, which formerly was the norm in public law and constitutions. “Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception,” the Catechism states, “From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life” (par 2270). For the United States Constitution, as well as all state constitutions, guarantees a public and political right to “life.” And those constitutions are secular, not religious, documents.

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.

About Thomas R. Ascik 16 Articles

Thomas R. Ascik is an attorney who has written on a variety of legal and constitutional issues.

The New Under Ground Church-THE TRUTH MUST BE TOLD

Friday, October 2, 2020