American Catholics challenge church’s birth control rules
Guest commentary
What are reproductive ethics?
Who decides what they will be? It
depends upon whom you ask.
A chance encounter with Con
science, a journal of pro-choice
Catholic opinion, introduced me to
a very large community of people
who think reproductive decisions for
themselves lie with themselves.
These, I discovered, are not lib
ertine, anti-institutional, anti-gov
ernment people on the fringe of so
ciety. Rather, they are serious,
caring individuals well-versed in
the issues of reproduction, contra
ception, abortion, social health and
family life. They include priests
and nuns, scholars and teachers,
and, of course, parishioners.
Their journal is forthright in an
nouncing its purpose. Its goal, it de
clares, is to promote sexual and re
productive ethics “based on justice,
reflect a commitment to women’s
well-being, and respect and affirm the
moral capacity of women and men to
make sound and responsible deci
sions about their lives.” Despite the
low media profile of this group, the
majority of the American Catholic
community thinks this way.
About 59 percent of Catholic
women of childbearing age practice
birth control, essentially the same
percentage as the larger American
community. In addition, a stunning
88 percent of American Catholics
think someone who practices birth
control can still be a good Catholic.
This Catholic community must
have its emotional struggles, for their
decisions run counter to the church
they love and counter to efforts of
the church hierarchy to have them
accept church teachings. Despite
proscriptions on behavior, threats of
excommunication, denial of sacra
ments, generous doses of guilt, and
that favorite tactic, claims of the in
fallibility of the church and Pope,
these Catholics know that they and
they alone will determine their most
personal matters.
As one person put it, “Bishops
never acknowledge that family plan
ning assistance saves lives and en
ables women and families to take
better advantage of economic and
educational opportunities.” Why
this disparity? Why this profound
difference between Catholic leader
ship and American parishioners?
Simply put, American Catholics
are well-educated. They are con
versant with world affairs and
trends. In that distinctively Ameri
can way, they’re not blindly sub
servient to authority. They know,
as the Alan Guttmacher Institute
reports, that access to affordable
contraception can reduce a
woman’s chance of having an abor
tion by 85 percent. They know that
worldwide, unsafe abortions are
the leading cause of maternal
deaths. They know that pregnancy
and childbirth take the lives of
600,000 women each year. They
know that unbridled reproduction
can be devastating to themselves
and the children they do want.
So where does this dissenting ma
jority go from here?
Even more than Americans at
large, they support efforts of the
United Nations Population Fund to
slow population growth. They con
tinue to confront that most patriar
chal of institutions, the National
Conference of Catholic Bishops.
They force public dialogue on public
policy, community life, social think
ing and teaching, and womens’
health and personal development.
It’s quite an ambitious undertaking,
but it will determine the quality and
character of their lives and the lives
of their families.
They will not go quietly into
the night.
Glen Kaye lives in Salem.
Protesters need to review their belief system
Guest commentary
Well, I support free speech and the right of
people to assemble and demonstrate peace
fully. However, there are a few things that I’d
like to point out to all of you protesters.
First, this war isn’t about oil! If you think
it is, stop driving your car! You’re like the
“vegetarian” that wears leather shoes. You
don’t have a moral leg to stand on.
Second, some of you are just hippie
want-to-bes and aren’t sure what you be
lieve. You’re just jumping on the band wag
on or have a hidden agenda.
Third, what if Sept. 11,2001, would have
happened in Portland, Eugene or Seattle?
Do you honestly think you would still be
against the war? I think not. Iraq and Sad
dam Hussein are bent on the destruction of
Israel and the west. Are you anti-semitic,
or does your loathing of our government
reach new heights? By the way, did you
vote? The Muslim extremists will stop at
nothing to include suicide bombings to kill
you (yes, you)! It is an automatic ticket to
heaven in their eyes. It doesn’t matter how,
to kill an infidel is a rubber stamp to heav
en! Ticket punched.
Fourth, President George W. Bush is
looking after the safety of the U.S. citizen
ry. His job is to protect us, get it? Stop ar
guing about the legitimacy of his presiden
cy. Get over it and get behind him and the
defense of our way of life.
Fifth, I am a soldier and have been for 22
years. I was born and raised in Oregon. I
was bom and raised to protect the environ
ment, like most of my fellow Oregonians.
We need to get over our dependency on oil
and especially foreign oil. If oil was worth
nothing, those people over there wouldn’t
have the money to hurt us and just would
n’t matter anymore. I didn’t say this was
about oil. I said they wouldn’t have the
money to hurt us anymore.
Sixth, many men and women of all races
have died to make this country free and an
example of what is right in the world. Iso
lationism isn’t the answer. We are not safe
when our own technology is used against
us (airliners full of innocent passengers). I
do not question your patriotism; I only
question your thought processes that went
in to your position.
Finally, soldiers fight for each other. We
are sworn by oath to defend the constitu
tion of the United States against all ene
mies foreign and domestic and to obey
the orders of the president of the United
States and the orders of the officers ap
pointed over us according to regulations
and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
That is not an oath that I take lightly. You
may call it blind obedience. I call it mak
ing sure that you have the right to stand
in the street and state your opinion.
Richard A. Berger is in a 'C' Company Aviation
Unit stationed in South Korea.
Letter to the editor
Petroskey’s censorship
correctly portrayed
It is rare to find a published column that successful
ly combines passion with skilled writing. The Emer
ald’s Philip Huang achieved that with his column
about the arrogance of Dale Petroskey, president of
the Baseball Hall of Fame (“Unsportsmanlike con
duct,” April 15).
Petroskey showed his feet still are mired in the mud
of the Reagan administration, which he once served as
an assistant press agent, when he banned showing of
the baseball movie, “Bull Durham.” Huang accurately
portrayed him as a right-wing censor.
What Philip wrote reminds us that this nation and
its national game still should honor freedom of expres
sion. The actions of a petty man — Petroskey — re
mind us we need to stay watchful as the politics he sup
ports continue to threaten the rights of a people, as well
as the credibility of our national game.
George Beres
Eugene
INTERESTED IN
GIVING TOURS?
The Ambassador Program is seeking
students who are interested in getting
more involved at the University of
Oregon. The Ambassador Program is
hiring multiple undergraduates for
various positions.
Applications now available in
465 Oregon Hall
For further questions, call 346-1274
LAST <ALL!U
Applications
Due May 5th by 5 pm
in 465 Oregon Hall