Government has no legitimate role in abortion issue

The Boston Herald

Here I am in the middle of the road, a solid yellow line going in both directions.

What do I think about abortion?

I try not to think about abortion. It's too complicated, too controversial. I back away from the issue. You don't know a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes. Who am I to tell anyone else what she should do? Judge not lest ye be judged.

And yet, and yet ...

My church says abortion is wrong. My church, the Roman Catholic Church, believes that life begins at conception, that the first cells are infused with a soul and that all human life is sacred. Is the church right? I'm not sure, but if I am a member of that church then this is what I am supposed to believe.

As the head of the Roman Catholic Church in the Archdiocese of Boston, Cardinal Law has a moral obligation to let the people he leads know exactly where the church stands on abortion. And that's what he did two weeks ago in a letter in the Archdiocese newspaper, The Pilot.

The letter was strong, unflinching, direct: "Abortion destroys what is indisputable innocent human life. Hence it is utterly against the dignity invested by God in every human being. Further, in destroying human life, abortion destroys the primary good of all society. Thus it is not only a sin, but a crime."

You can't get much clearer than this. There's no waffling here. No middle of the road for Cardinal Law.

But his words are really no surprise. This is the church's long-held position freshly reiterated, no doubt, in response to Governor Weld's plan to abolish October as "Pro-life Month." Why shouldn't the cardinal make it perfectly clear what it is Catholics are supposed to believe? Why shouldn't the Cardinal remind Catholics in public life of their moral obligation to their church?

I admire the man. He has the courage to say what he believes. He should be respected for his candor and not reviled.

And yet in response to what he said, I have heard so many nasty remarks, so many unkind personal slurs about this man. People have denigrated his motives, his beliefs, even questioned his right to say what he said. In a recent letter to the editor, a person actually compared him to Adolph Hitler.

Where does all this hate come from? Why does hate have to be the by-product of what is nothing more than a moral argument over how best to help women in trouble? Those who would recommend an abortion and those who do not care what happens to pregnant women simply believe in different solutions to the problem.

And yet out of this desire to help, there has come nothing but finger-pointing and wagging tongues and needless judging - such raw, undiluted hate. She's no good. She's a jerk. She's a murderer. She's a fanatic.

It's like the Civil War, only this time instead of brother against brother, it's mother against daughter, sister against sister, friend against friend, abortion foes against abortion-rights advocates, such combative, restrictive words for something too big to be reduced to this bumper-sticker morality.

I detest this polarizing of people. I detest the demonstrations and marches and blockades which are too loud, too smug, too mean to allow for reasoned dialogue. I detest the holier-than-thou attitude of people who seem to have forgotten the greatest commandment: Love thy neighbor. I detest the fact that the government is the primary party involved in a decision that should be between a woman and her doctor and God.

The Catholic Church is a voluntary religious organization. Nobody forces anyone to be Catholic. The cardinal is not overstepping his bounds when he speaks out against abortion. But the government continues to overstep its bounds by being involved in this controversy at all.