American Papist posts on Doug Kmiec’s latest fogbound rationales. I channeled Mark Shea and Zippy and contributed some comments, but then I realized I missed a detail in Kmiec’s words (My emphasis):
The president’s rationale was motivated by Third World conditions, and we need to ask ourselves how we in opposition would formulate an answer for the millions of non-Catholics who were at risk of fatal illness in developing countries for lack of non-abortifacient, contraceptive services that were swept within the previous policy.
And there is that same darn thing I keep running into. I’ve heard it from conservatives. I’ve heard it from middle-of-the-roaders. And I’ve heard it from moobat lefty RCIA directors–that as long as a contraceptive is non-abortifacient, it is ok to use. That ain’t the teaching. The teaching does not stand of fall on abortifacient properties. Perhaps this explains the bewildering Catholic support for the “reducing abortions” marketing scam as Obama rolls back every pro-life success he encounters. Kmiec and others need to either demonstrate that they know the correct teaching and affirm it (in which case they have lots of splainin’ to do to make their craptacular proposals make a lick of sense), or they need to confess they dissent on Church teaching (in which case their proposals make a little more sense but add the feature of being DEAD WRONG.)