November 20, 2012      Martin Mallon  (Ireland)      Martin's previous articles

                    WHO TO  BELIEVE?

An interesting phenomomen occurred during the recent American Presidential election. The voters of Massachusetts rebuffed an attempt to legalise physician assisted suicide (PAS). Massachusetts is well known as a liberal bastion and any vote involving personal choice would normally be passed. However, in this case the vote went the other way and there appear to be two views on how this came about.  

One view is that of Michael Sean Winters, writing in the National Catholic Reporter on 8 November. As he writes “It was a stunning victory” and he believes the support of Mrs Vicki Kennedy, the widow of Senator Edward Kennedy, was a decisive factor in this success. Winters writes that:  

…She put a human face on the issue, a face the people of Massachusetts loved, the face of her late husband. She recalled that his doctors gave him four months to live and he lived sixteen months after his diagnosis. She talked about what he accomplished in those six months, especially the time spent with his family. The people of the Bay State went through those last days of the Senator’s life, so Mrs. Kennedy was not only recalling her own memories, but touching the chord of memory among the entire electorate…

 Winters also gives credit to Cardinal Sean O’Malley for attending the Senator’s public funeral despite calls from “conservative” Catholics for no public funeral. Winters asks these conservatives:  

Do you think Mrs. Kennedy would have been more likely or less likely to assist the Church in defeating this euthanasia ballot if the Church had taken the advice of these zealots and denied her husband a public funeral?

 Mr Winters goes on to point out that Mrs Kennedy was not the only so called “liberal” to support the Church viewpoint:  

Many on the Catholic Right have spoken of E.J. Dionne and Stephen Schneck as if they were the anti-Christ during this campaign season, but both men wrote articles opposing euthanasia that received wide distribution.  

The hierarchy need to consider the following fundamental argument:  

If we continue to ban people from Catholic campus speaking engagements because of this issue or that, if we refuse to hire anyone who ever worked for a Democrat, if we refuse to dine with the Catholic Left, how can we enlist their aid, as Cardinal O’Malley did in Boston, when we might need it?  

The Legionaries of Christ promote the Zenit news service which on the 15 November published an article by Elizabeth Lev, from a different point of view, on the same topic. She agreed that:  

It seemed impossible – Massachusetts , the first state in the Union to allow homosexual marriage, with a media machine that was favorable to the referendum – appeared sure to win.  

By October the act looked sure to pass as polls showed 65% of voters supporting a yes vote:  

So with the proponents of the act held up as protectors of human dignity and those who opposed represented as hate groups, by October 2012, one month away from the election, polls showed that 65% of voters were favorable to the measure. Stephen Crawford, communications director of the Dignity 2012 campaign was able to boast “We're confident … that we'll be successful in November,”  

Lev writes that the result was mainly due to 130,000 Pentecostals:  

As Reverend Gene Rivers, of the Azusa Christian Community recognized the dangers of physician assisted suicide to his community, he spoke to his fellow Pentecostal pastors who turned to their flocks. Pentecostals make up 2% of the 6.5 million population of Massachusetts, about 130,000 people. Knocking on doors, sending emails and preaching from the pulpit, this number made a difference.  

It is difficult to imagine that that the Pentecostals made that big a difference; no doubt they helped, but perhaps not to the extent believed by Lev:  

As Reverend Rivers and his fellowship persuaded their parishes, person by person and service after service, the tide of voters against the measure swelled and ultimately were able to  close a 15 point margin in three weeks, snatching victory from the very jaws of defeat.  

The above demonstrates the two differing points of view. I believe Winters’ view holds the most merit due to an article he wrote, before the vote, on 30 October. The headline read:

THIS IS HUGE: VICKI KENNEDY OPPOSES PAS

The last paragraph of this article states:

This is HUGE. I suspect Mrs. Kennedy's intervention could well tip the balance in the upcoming referendum. Will she still be persona non grata in some circles? Perhaps. But, I want to send her flowers today - and Bishop McManus should do so also, along with an invitation to speak from the pulpit of his cathedral!  

There were many factors involved in this vote, but this article convinces me that Mrs Kennedy’s support was “huge”, especially in light of Lev’s article that pointed out that in the October polls “65% of voters were favorable to the measure.”

It is essential that the hierarchy wake up to Winters’ plea:

If we continue to ban people from Catholic campus speaking engagements because of this issue or that, if we refuse to hire anyone who ever worked for a Democrat, if we refuse to dine with the Catholic Left, how can we enlist their aid, as Cardinal O’Malley did in Boston, when we might need it?  

Michael Sean Winters, article from 30 October 2012

Michael Sean Winters, article from 8 November 2012  

Elizabeth Lev, article from 15 November