More from Eduardo

Here are Eduardo's thoughts in response to Robert George's latest:

I thank Prof. George for his willingness to engage us in this interesting discussion.  But I must respectfully express my continued belief that he misunderstands the point of Michael's original post.  No one doubts the value of the seamless garment, although we may disagree about the specific details of that garment's patterns.  I think (if I may speak for Michael) that the purpose of his original post was simply to point out the ways in which people choose to emphasize one or another aspect of that garment depending on their partisan preferences.  (The Church's teachings on abortion are really a more apt comparison than its teachings on sexual ethics in this regard, if only because so few Catholics of any political stripe accept the Church's teachings on contraception.)

Catholic Democrats are often accused of soft-pedaling the Church's position on abortion, with which they purport to agree. (John Kerry's lame answer in the presidential debates comes to mind.)  On the other hand, Republican Catholic public intellectuals have been notably silent on the torture question.

To respond to this observation by offering to sign a joint statement affirming the seamless garment really misses the point.  If anything, it strengthens the point I took Michael to be making.  Catholic Republicans do not feel compelled to talk about the death penalty and torture every time they want to criticize the Democrats for their position on legal abortion.  Why, then, the need to bring up abortion (etc.) when a question is posed about the intrinsic evil of this administration's policies on torture?  I simply do not agree that it would be pointless to issue a statement signed by Catholics across the political spectrum condemning torture without mentioning other aspects of the seamless garment.  Would it be equally pointless for Catholic Republicans and Democrats to join hands to sign a statement reaffirming their belief in the evil of abortion?