New York Daily News

States have rights — with big limits

- J.T. Barbarese

Camden, N.J.: Charles Camosy’s guest op-ed (“Biden’s HHS vs. abortion common ground,” Nov. 30), an unofficial amicus brief supporting the return of the right to regulate abortion to the states (like Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is trying to do), is either fatuous or disingenuo­us. And the last person one wants protecting the individual’s right to choose is a profession­al theologian. We fought a civil war to emphasize that no one state or confederac­y can overrule all the others. Mississipp­i is not the United States, a difference that’s not only obvious but decisive if the conversati­on turns to abortion (or race). If the states’ rights argument had prevailed in the last quarter of the 19th century, slaves would still be slaves in 11 states and the practice of certain religious faiths — like Catholicis­m, the sect I was raised in — would be dangerous or socially sanctioned. There are states’ rights and human rights. It’s the federal government’s job, not the job of a state motivated by sectional pride and religious bias, to protect the latter by regulating the former.

If my former co-religionis­ts and Catholic theologian­s find this offensive, blame it on my high school education and what I learned from a Jesuit named Frank Moan. One afternoon, I caught him with his feet up on his desk and reading “Candide.” A 17-year-old wiseass, I reminded him that all of Voltaire was on the Church’s Index Expurgator­ius, or index of forbidden books. In other words, if he dropped dead that moment, he’d go straight to hell. The late Frank Moan didn’t even look up. “God gave me my free will before the Church gave you your Index,” he said, and threw me out of his office.

 ?? GETTY IMAGES ??
GETTY IMAGES

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States