Some reports:

Philadelphia Inquirer:

Decrying a climate of "fear" and division in the nation, Casey called for a renewed commitment to the "common good" and for political leadership that demands shared sacrifice in order to achieve it.

"We must recommit ourselves to affirming the human dignity of every individual," Casey said, outlining a political philosophy shaped by faith during a speech at the university’s Columbus School of Law.

"We can live up to our moral obligation to promote the common good only when we see the connection between our individual well-being and that of our neighbors, and the connection between our national security and the security of all nations," Casey said. "This is an idea worthy of our sacrifice and the proud traditions of our nation and our faith."

Washington Post:

Turning to abortion, he called for Democrats and Republicans to "unite . . . behind the understanding that the common good requires us to value all life." As an example, he cited legislation proposed by House Democrats that would target "the underlying factors that often lead women to choose abortion."

Some of the sharpest language in Casey’s speech was aimed at his party. In 1992, the Democratic National Committee did not let Casey’s father, then-Gov. Robert P. Casey Sr., speak at its national convention because of his antiabortion views. Referring to that "dark night," the younger Casey said the party "insulted the most courageous pro-life Democrat in the land, who asked that those who believed in the right to life be accorded the right to speak."

But he also had some sharp words for conservatives who focus primarily on the rights of the unborn. "If we are going to be pro-life, we cannot say we are against abortion . . . and then let our children suffer in broken schools," he said. "We can’t claim to be pro-life at the same time we are cutting support for Medicaid, Head Start or the Women, Infants and Children’s Program."

The video of the speech will be available here after noon.

All very nice, but what does "pro-life" mean?

Since the pro-life movement in this country has three primary components: 1) Direct assistance to women and children in need 2) working for legal restrictions and prohibitions  and 3) education, it would be helpful if Casey’s self-proclaimed "pro-life" position could be teased out more specifically. The money question is: Do you think abortion should be discouraged as a negative choice – as, say, we do, for smoking in this country?

The second money question is – Tell me about your familiarity with the pro-life movement and your support of initiatives and programs that come out of it.

A 2005 interview with Casey from Ignatius Insight.

His response to questions from the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference:

Please comment on the following issues or initiatives:

* Expanding protection and support for unborn children and their mothers in Pennsylvania.
I am a pro-life Democrat, and there are more of us out there than the press would lead you to believe, but probably not enough in high elected office. If this country ever witnessed a time period where the Supreme Court would overturn Roe v. Wade and that decision came back to the states, I would hope that Pennsylvania would enact legislation protecting the unborn.

But on this issue it’s important to be both honest and respectful to people who disagree. We are going to have to forge some consensus if we’re really going to tackle the problem. We have a lot of disagreement on abortion across the country. At the same time there is a lot of consensus that we should work together to do everything we can to help support women and families facing unexpected or crisis pregnancies. Family planning is another area where there is a great deal of consensus in the country. People that disagree on a lot of things agree that we should provide that.

We also must face the important question of what this country does for a woman who makes a choice to bear a child. Do we do everything possible to help her through that experience; before, during, and after the pregnancy? Pope John Paul II many years ago spoke of a “radical solidarity” with a woman who faces a pregnancy. Women don’t have to be poor or single mothers to get scared and feel like they are alone and that no one is going to stand with them and support them. We need to enact legislation and support initiatives that reflect our solidarity with women. I believe that there is a great deal of consensus and common ground in this area, even if the newspapers don’t write about it. The Catholic Church can and should continue to talk about it, however, and we need to continue to speak vocally about the importance of understanding that being pro-life must include more than simply being against abortion. We cannot allow people to call themselves pro-life or say they are in favor of life when they support cutting services that help pregnant women, new mothers, and their children. That is just wrong.

More from Beliefnet and our partners
Close Ad