Few religious issues have engendered such controversy or
national attention as Representative Patrick Kennedy�s (D-RI) stand in
defending abortion rights within the debate over national health care. Thus
far, however, federal funding of abortion under any health care �compromise�
between the House and Senate is a nonissue, as inclusion of any federal funds
for abortion was effectively halted when health care legislation was passed by
the House. So, though significant, Representative Kennedy�s position, while
noble, is academic.
The issue of Kennedy�s stand on abortion began when he
received a letter from Rhode Island�s Catholic Bishop, Thomas J. Tobin, in 2007
that requested Kennedy not receive Communion when attending Mass (Karen Lee
Ziner, �Providence Bishop Tobin says Kennedy �erratic��but he�s not referring
to mental-health issues,� The Providence Journal, November 24, 2009). The issue surfaced again during the health
care debate in Congress when Kennedy publically stated, �How the Catholic
Church could be against the biggest social justice issue of our time.� (Ian
Urbina, �Kennedy Discouraged From Communion by Bishop,� The New York Times, November 22, 2009). Kennedy added that
his stance was fanning the �flames of dissent and discord.� (The New York
Times, November 22, 2009).
The issue of Kennedy�s personal and political beliefs about
abortion took a bizarre twist when Rhode Island�s governor, Donald Carcieri,
entered the fray. Carcieri, an ultraconservative Republican, stated that
Kennedy was making �outrageous statements about the Catholic Church� according
to The Providence Journal (Katherine Gregg, �R.I. governor sides with
bishop, says Kennedy�s remarks �outrageous,�� November 26, 2009). Prior to the
governor�s condemnation of Kennedy, Bishop Tobin accused Kennedy of exhibiting
�increasingly erratic and unpredictable behavior� (The Providence Journal, November 24, 2009).
The public attacks against Representative Kennedy have all
the earmarks of how ultraconservative religious and public figures in the U.S.
viciously attack someone with whom they disagree over issues that challenge
their faith. These attacks by the far right are always cast within extreme
ideological positions. In Kennedy�s case, the attacks surpass vitriol as the congressman
has sought professional help for both mental health and substance abuse issues
in the past and has publically acknowledged these personal problems. Particularly
disingenuous and hurtful to Kennedy is the fact that the Catholic Bishop of
Rhode Island has sought to attack Kennedy�s public stance on abortion by making
reference to these personal problems that any religion must consider as being
solely within the purview of private interaction between a religious figure and
a member of his faith.
From my understanding of Roman Catholicism, a relationship
between a parishioner and any official of the church is sacrosanct and
deserving of the most jealously guarded constraints of privacy. Indeed,
Catholic priests have been forced by courts in the U.S. to provide information
about a suspected wrongdoer only under duress. It seems, however, that the
bishop of Rhode Island follows none of these dictates and has been more than
ready to make political grist out of the statements and position of one of the
church�s followers.
I know something about the Catholic Church�s reactions and
actions regarding the right to reproductive freedom that women in the U.S. won
by way of the U.S. Supreme Court�s decision in Roe v. Wade (1973). In
particular, I am well aware of how the church treats those who seek to have
abortions in Rhode Island, as I was an escort at women�s reproductive clinics
in Rhode Island for over a decade.
One women�s clinic where I volunteered was located a block
away from a Catholic church in Providence. As I gained experience dealing with
anti-abortionists while I escorted women (and those who accompanied them)
seeking treatment at this facility, I witnessed the extreme animosity that
these �protesters� met people with at this clinic. Hollering and accosting
women as they walked to the clinic doors was only part of the treatment that
anti-abortionists exhibited. Shrieking prayers and huge, poster-size pictures
of supposedly aborted fetuses lined the fence that separated the sidewalk from
the property of the clinic. Priests were a regular part of a larger
demonstration that took place monthly at the clinic when the numbers of protesters
swelled to well over a hundred.
At another clinic, across the city, where I had escorted
less frequently years earlier, escorts were attacked during the frenzy that
marked the anti-abortion movement in the early 1990s. In one case, escorts were
able to keep the clinic from being breached by anti-abortionists, including a
priest, until police arrived. I wonder how the Bishop Tobin would characterize
those actions by anti-abortionists? Perhaps classifying them as both �erratic
and unpredictable� would be an understatement?
Attacks against the rights of women to reproductive health,
including the right to abortion, are particularly prevalent among the right
wing and especially by the legions of members of organized religion. Historically,
it has been the objective of most major religions to force women into
subservience. In their right-wing denominations, Christianity, Judaism, and
Islam all seek to maintain this subservient role of women. Also, within that
role, women�s sexuality is a target of that same control. Elaborate myths are
constructed that place women in the role of serving men in each of these
branches of the world�s major religions (Eastern religions are also no
exception to these �traditions�). The rights of the fetus are held above the
right of the living to a full and secure life.
Conveniently, long ago forgotten, among the religious on the
right, is the separation of church and state enshrined in the First Amendment.
So when religious leaders such as Bishop Tobin issue vicious responses to
challenges to the church�s anti-abortion stand, it should come as no surprise
that these attacks violate the most sacred trust that is at the heart of any
religious tradition: the sanctity of an individual�s beliefs. On a most
personal level, it seems that Representative Kennedy�s recent loss of his
father, Ted, the late senator from Massachusetts, is of no importance as a
religious �leader� and politician attempt to demonize his valiant stand.
Howard Lisnoff is a freelance writer. He can be
reached through his website howielisnoff.com.