Tuesday 28 October 2008

Pelvic Theology: The Bleat Goes On and On and On …

Yet another high-falutin’ Catholic cleric has his ecclesiastical pantaloons in a knot.

Fordham University Law School’s plan to give an award to the Supreme Court justice Stephen G. Breyer on Wednesday night has drawn criticism from Cardinal Edward M. Egan … Justice Breyer wrote the majority opinion in the Supreme Court’s 2000 decision overturning Nebraska’s ban on late-term, or so-called partial-birth, abortion. One of the reasons he cited was that the law was unconstitutional because it made no exception for situations in which the mother’s health was at risk.

He is not the first supporter of abortion rights to receive the Fordham ethics prize, established in 1976 to recognize “individuals whose work exemplifies outstanding standards of professional
conduct, promotes the advancement of justice and brings credit to the profession” of the law. But other members of the court who joined in opinions upholding abortion rights — Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who received the prize in 2001, and former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who was given the award in 1992 — did not draw criticism from Catholic activists and the hierarchy.

Ah, but Bader Ginsberg and Day O’Connor were not awarded this recognition during a presidential election campaign where the issue of abortion has become confrontational and is being framed in terms that escape the control of the fetus fetishists.

In recent months, the Cardinal Newman Society, which brought wide attention to this year’s award, has become increasingly outspoken in its criticism of Catholic university officials perceived as less than faithful to church doctrine.

On Oct. 9, Mr. Reilly labeled it “a serious scandal” when Pamela Trotman Reid, the president of St. Joseph College in West Hartford, Conn., was quoted in The Hartford Courant as saying she was “concerned about the right of women to make choices about their own health” if John McCain became president. … In an interview, Mr. Reilly said that the society’s criticisms were not intended to favor one party or candidate over another, or to discourage the exercise of free speech on Catholic campuses.

Or to ensure that the Catholic Church maintains control over women’s reproductive health? As was
affirmed at Birth Pangs, these robe-wearing misogynists meddle in political and legal issues because of the implicit authority they claim: Pelvic Theology.

First posted at Birth Pangs

No comments:

Post a Comment