Fake Site News Falsely Accuses New Pro Life Movement of “Liberal Boilerplate”

In a shameful piece of character assassination against fellow Patheos blogger Rebecca Bratten Weiss, Fake Site News (the credulous call it Life Site) made the false and ignorant claim that the goals of the New Pro Life Movement are no more than “liberal boilerplate.” I will not dignify this with a link. But feel free to seek it out if you have a penance to do.

Now, I am sorry to have to point out the obvious to Fake Site, truly. But in fact, the goals of the New Pro Life Movement are the Magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church.

The New Pro Life Movement was founded by Ms. Weiss and Matthew Tyson, who also blogs on this site. You can read their goals here. So let’s go through them one by one; and let us see if there be boilerplate in them. There are ten.

1. “We believe all humans have an absolute, inherent right to life, and we believe this right spans from conception to natural death.”

But is this Catholic teaching? Indeed it is. The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (CSD) says:

Promoting human dignity implies above all affirming the inviolability of the right to life, from conception to natural death, the first among all rights and the condition for all other rights of the person.

And St. John Paul II writes in Evangelium Vitae (EV):

The Church declares that unconditional respect for the right to life of every innocent person—from conception to natural death—is one of the pillars on which every civil society stands.

And the Catechism (CCC) says: “The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation” (§2273).

2. “We are completely, totally, and without reservation opposed to the act of abortion.”

But is this Catholic teaching? Indeed it is. CCC §2322: “From its conception, the child has the right to life. Direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, is a ‘criminal’ practice, gravely contrary to the moral law.”

3. “The pervasive sexual harassment, violence, and prejudice against women is a pro-life issue by itself, and we support every effort to put an end to these issues. We are committed to the protection of women’s rights and equality, the advancement of equal representation under the law, and respect for women in all areas of our culture.

But is this Catholic teaching? Indeed it is.

On sexual harrassment. CSD §245 condemns any form of “sexual exploitation.”

In the same paragraph, it condemns “every form of violence.” “Where there is violence,” the Church says (§488), “God cannot be present.” “Violence is evil,” she tells us (§496). “Violence is a lie, for it goes against the truth of our faith, the truth of our humanity. Violence destroys what it claims to defend: the dignity, the life, the freedom of human beings.” In particular, CCC §2356 condemns rape. Rape “is always an intrinsically evil act.”

On equality of women under the law. The CSD tells us that God is “the ultimate foundation of the radical equality and brotherhood among all people, regardless of their race, nation, sex, origin, culture, or class. CSD §145 says:

It is necessary in particular to help the least, effectively ensuring conditions of equal opportunity for men and women and guaranteeing an objective equality between the different social classes before the law.

4. “We fear that by legalizing euthanasia, we create a world that puts the elderly and terminally ill at risk. We also cannot encourage a society that supports the right to die and not the right to live.

But is this Catholic teaching? Indeed it is.

The CSD teaches:

The first right presented in this list is the right to life, from conception to its natural end, which is the condition for the exercise of all other rights and, in particular, implies the illicitness of every form of procured abortion and of euthanasia.

CCC §2277 says euthanasia is “morally unacceptable.” St. John Paul II says that it is “opposed to life itself” (3). He continues:

Euthanasia is a grave violation of the law of God, since it is the deliberate and morally unacceptable killing of a human person. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written word of God, is transmitted by the Church’s Tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. (65)

5. “Military force is only justifiable when absolutely necessary to stop an unjust aggressor and protect the lives of innocent humans. Furthermore, in military conflict, we believe in the use of proportionate force only. This means an absolute rejection of killing civilians, torture and execution of POWs, and the use of nuclear arms.

But is this Catholic teaching? Indeed it is. This is called Just War doctrine; it has been around for a long, long time. Perhaps Fake Site News has heard of it. Or perhaps not. They will have to inform us.

In EV 27, St. John Paul II praises “a new sensitivity ever more opposed to war as an instrument for the resolution of conflicts between peoples.” And the CCC teaches:

2308 All citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war.

2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time: the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain; all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective; there must be serious prospects of success; the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition. These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the “just war” doctrine.

Moreover, the Church calls for nuclear disarmament in CSD §508-512. And in Gaudium et Spes 80 Vatican II teaches:

Any act of war aimed indiscriminately at the destruction of entire cities of extensive areas along with their population is a crime against God and man himself. It merits unequivocal and unhesitating condemnation.

6. “We support the absolute abolition of the death penalty.”

Yes, and so does Pope Francis. The CSD, citing John Paul II, says:

The growing number of countries adopting provisions to abolish the death penalty or suspend its application is also proof of the fact that cases in which it is absolutely necessary to execute the offender “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.”

Not only that, but the CSD says that those who oppose the death penalty have a “heightened moral awareness.”

7. “Healthcare is a right, not a product. One’s health should not be contingent on buying power. We believe that all citizens should have access to proper medical care, regardless of class, status, or income. Therefore, we support universal healthcare and advocate for a public option.

But is this Catholic teaching? Indeed it is. In CSD 166, the Church tells us that health care is a “human right.” A right, says the Church, not a consumer good. It is a “demand of the common good.” The preferential option for the poor (§182) includes the right to health care.

8. “Poverty has a direct effect on quality of life. We support comprehensive solutions to provide a realistic pathway out of poverty and we oppose any legislation that reduces wages, cuts benefits, or restricts labor rights.”

But is this Catholic teaching? You guessed it: Indeed it is. Denial of a just wage is a sin that cries to heaven for vengeance. “The rights of workers,” the CSD tells us, “are based on the nature of the human person and his transcendent dignity.” (Just as the rights of the unborn are.)

The Church’s social Magisterium has seen fit to list some of these rights, in the hope that they will be recognized in juridical systems: the right to a just wage; the right to rest; the right “to a working environment and to manufacturing processes which are not harmful to the workers’ physical health or to their moral integrity”; the right that one’s personality in the workplace should be safeguarded “without suffering any affront to one’s conscience or personal dignity”; the right to appropriate subsidies that are necessary for the subsistence of unemployed workers and their families; the right to a pension and to insurance for old age, sickness, and in case of work-related accidents; the right to social security connected with maternity; the right to assemble and form associations.

And the Church goes on to tell us why it is well to mention these things:

These rights are often infringed, as is confirmed by the sad fact of workers who are underpaid and without protection or adequate representation. It often happens that work conditions for men, women and children, especially in developing countries, are so inhumane that they are an offence to their dignity and compromise their health.

9. “We believe that protecting the environment, combating climate change, and caring for the world around us have a direct impact on our mission to “protect and sustain life from conception to natural death.” The NPLM supports all efforts to reduce carbon emissions, produce clean and renewable energy, and reverse the damage that decades of industrialization has done to our world.

But is this Catholic teaching? Has Fake Site News not heard of Laudato Si? One really must ask. The CSD has an entire chapter on the moral necessity to protect the environment. Pope Francis applies this teaching of the Church to new challenges (such as carbon emissions, clean energy, industrialization, and so on) in Laudato Si. Tolle, lege, Fake Site.

10. “We cannot in good conscience call ourselves pro-life and ignore the pervasive gun violence in our country.”

This is so obvious I marvel greatly that it should need defending. Murder is a mortal sin, right? It is an offense against life? It is society’s business to stop it? I don’t really need to cite Church documents to establish this, do I?

Now, Catholics can, exercising prudential judgment, differ about how to go about achieving these objectives. One could say, “I don’t know that I am on board with all of NPLM’s particular solutions.” That’s fine.

But what one can not do is use “prudential judgment” as an excuse to say, “Well, I’m just going to disregard what the Church says about all these things other than abortion.” No. Prudential judgment means: How do I best put the Church’s teaching into practice? It does not mean: Which Church teachings do I get to ignore?

And what one can not do is dismiss the NPLM’s goals as “liberal boilerplate” when they are, every last one of them, the Magisterial teaching of the Church. And you don’t get to insinuate that someone who supports NPLM is somehow a dissident Catholic.

Fake Site News should spend less time writing hit pieces against good and decent Catholics like Rebecca Bratten Weiss, and more time reading Church documents. Get on it, Fake Site.