Scientific progress has resulted in advances that are unsettling for the consciences of men and women and call for solutions that respect ethical principles in a coherent and fundamental way. At the same time, legislative proposals are put forward which, heedless of the consequences for the existence and future of human beings with regard to the formation of culture and social behaviour, attack the very inviolability of human life. Catholics, in this difficult situation, have the right and the duty to recall society to a deeper understanding of human life and to the responsibility of everyone in this regard. John Paul II, continuing the constant teaching of the Church, has reiterated many times that those who are directly involved in lawmaking bodies have a "grave and clear obligation to oppose" any law that attacks human life. For them, as for every Catholic, it is impossible to promote such laws or to vote for them
If Ruth Kelly is sent spiritual encouragement, SPUC will be isolated in pointing out the truly dreadful positions she has adopted whilst remaining a prominent member of Opus Dei. Remember she once defended her position as the minister responsible for embryo research.Original post: Isn't it grand? Ruth Kelly, reportedly a member of Opus Dei, refuses to do her duty as an MP and vote against the grossly immoral HFE bill but will salve her conscience by being away. Well done, Ruth!
From SPUC: It is said that Ms Ruth Kelly MP, a Catholic cabinet minister, has been given permission to be absent overseas and, thus, abstain from voting onthe UK government's Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill. The other twoCatholics in the cabinet are expected to toe the party line. [Times, 1July, and Telegraph, 1 July] Anthony Ozimic, SPUC political secretary:"Parliamentarians have a grave and clear obligation to vote against anylaw permitting the intentional destruction of innocent human life, such asthe HFE bill. Abstaining is not a legitimate option for a pro-life MP.Arranging to be absent is an unacceptable fudge, as it would constitute adeliberate failure to protect the unborn from indignity, abuse and death."