Another review of Arbp. Chaput

Michael linked to Prof. Kmiec's review of Arbp. Chaput's "Render Unto Caesar". (He is not the reviewer I would have expected, given that "Render" is a pretty forceful critique of Kmiec's current thinking about politics and abortion.)  In any event, for another review of "Render" -- by a Commonweal blogger, as it happens -- see Fr. Robert Imbelli's, here.

Kmiec's review also discusses Chris Korzen's and Alexia Kelley's "A Nation for All".  He writes that "Korzen and Kelley demonstrate how emphasizing anti-Roe strategies alone sits uneasily with the church’s promise of religious freedom to all in Vatican II’s Dignitatis humanae (1965)."  It surprises me that Kmeic wrotes this, since I would not have thought he believes that Dignitatis poses any barrier to making it possible (by reversing Roe) for citizens to choose to do what Kmiec (and Pope Benedict, whom Kmiec quotes) think they should do, i.e., protect unborn children in law from private lethal violence.  One can agree (as I do) with our MOJ-friend Fr. Greg Kalscheur that Dignitatis does provide support for arguments against morals legislation that does not relate to the public good; still, the claim that Dignitatis provides support for those who think that Roe ought not to be overturned, or that abortion regulations involve the imposition of specifically religious notions, is, it seems to me, a long way from plausible.

Kmiec also writes, "[t]o reduce abortion they suggest providing health care and economic assistance to women and families, robust alternatives such as support for adoption and appropriate and effective sex education for young people, and a host of other policy measures that have proved capable of reducing the abortion rate in the United States and around the world. Thanks to the efforts of Sen. Obama, much of that language is now in the Democratic Party platform."  I suspect -- I have not read the book -- that Korzen and Kelley do not contend that the other likely fruits of the "efforts of Sen. Obama" -- e.g., the repeal of pro-life limits on federal funding of abortions, at home and abroad -- are likely to reduce the abortion rate.  After all, it seems hard to reduce the incidence of something that one (a) celebrates as a fundamental right; (b) subsidizes financially; and (c) insists should be free from existing limitations.

Kmiec also says, "is a Catholic voter supposed to overlook how the Republican Party has failed to deliver Roe’s reversal in thirty-five years?"  Of course, as Kmiec knows, the failure to "deliver Roe's reversal" is at least as much the result of Democratic-led confirmation battles that have made it extremely difficult -- yet, somehow, Republican Presidents have succeeded four times since Reagan was elected -- to get Justices who understand Roe's error confirmed.  We could just as well ask why a Catholic voter should overlook "how the Democratic Party has blocked -- indeed, demonized -- efforts to deliver Roe's reversal for thirty-five years."