Mr. Davis ("Democrats are in line with Catholic faith," April 23),
Almost all those things that you list under the Democratic platform are not disputed by anyone. No one wants HIV/AIDS in the world or health care that's unaffordable or endless wars. It's not the ends that are disputed, but the means. Now, I'm not sure what the most "efficient" economic means are for producing these ends, but there are some social means that are evil and against the Church's teaching and, therefore, must not be tolerated.
Abortion and contraception are among these. Capital punishment has never been declared to be on the same plane as abortion, so the support of some Republican candidates for capital punishment is not in itself against the teachings of the Church.
To vote for someone such as Obama who actively promotes abortion and contraception in his rhetoric and his policies is, in fact, to support that rhetoric and those policies. To vote for some Republican who will actively promote torture in rhetoric and policies is also to support that rhetoric and those policies.
Isn't it the case though that the Democratic party has, as part of its platform, a direct violation of the Church's teaching whereas the Republican platform does not itself support torture? Some Democrats may be against this aspect of their platform, but the platform remains the belief of the party in general.
So, let us not be bogged down though in party politics. Let us judge each candidate separately. Does this candidate support something that violates Church teaching? It is doubtful that abortion or torture are the goals of the candidate, but they certainly are part of the path to those goals. If a candidate is willing to use evil means for his goals, then he is not to be supported, regardless of party.
Nathaniel Gotcher
junior
abroad
April 23
