Religion & Law

I couldn't help thinking, when I read the America op-ed that Michael reproduced in his post, that perhaps it should have been called "The Art of the little that is now, given the elections of the candidates we at America supported, possible".  (But, in keeping with my sunny disposition and certified-snark-free blog-persona, I suppressed that thought.)

Still, the way the op-ed put it -- i.e., "there are several strategies the new president could employ that would reduce the number of abortions" -- provides an irresistible occasion (sorry) for me to insist, yet again, that, as I see it, "the issue" with respect to abortion is not merely "reducing the number of abortions".  It is repudiating our current, deeply unjust legal regime with respect to abortion.  The America piece concludes with a quote from John Paul II, "It is not enough to remove unjust laws.... For this reason there need to be set in place social and political initiatives capable of guaranteeing conditions of true freedom of choice in matters of parenthood.?  Yes.  But these initiatives (like any decline in the number of abortions they might bring about) will not render our unjust laws just (or excuse support for these laws).  Certainly, the Pope was not suggesting otherwise.  In politics -- and this side of Heaven -- it is always wise, it seems to me, to focus on what's possible.  At the same time, when it comes to matters of basic justice, and fundamental human rights, I would think it a mistake to ever be complacent about, or resigned to, those forces, laws, theories, or candidates who unjustly shrink the zone of the possible.