Editorial

Freedom: Our ancestors fought for rights we enjoy

Recently I had the opportunity to travel to Washington, D.C., for a meeting and took the opportunity to travel to Williamsburg, Va., for some sightseeing.

As I visited the historic sites, I realized what a debt of gratitude we Americans owe to our ancestors. Without them, we might not have the freedoms we possess today.

Trip back in time. It was my first visit to Williamsburg, which has been restored to appear as it did just prior to the American Revolution. It is literally a trip back in time, with people living much like they did in the 18th century.

On the surface, Williamsburg seems like a quiet little town. Life seems much simpler. People are hard-working yet friendly.

Yet, as we talked with the residents, we realized they have much on their minds. They are not happy with the British rule of Virginia. They don't like unfair laws enacted in England, including high taxes and forced quartering of British soldiers in their homes. We learn that the people love England and consider themselves English citizens. But they want to elect their own government and make their own rules.

Cry for independence. The cry for independence was being heard in Massachusetts and the people of Virginia find themselves torn. Patrick Henry shouts, "Give me liberty or give me death!" Thomas Jefferson speaks of democracy. Yet, the citizens of Williamsburg are reluctant to leave their families and friends and go to war.

We could feel the thoughts and emotions of the people leaning toward supporting the American Revolution. We wondered: Could we have made such a commitment? Would we have fought for freedom?

Debt of gratitude. The United States today owes much to both England and our ancestors who fought for freedom. Our form of government is based extensively on English traditions. But Americans added their own unique ideas to create a new republic with a comprehensive "bill of rights" ensuring "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" for all.

American ideals. Today, as our nation is engaged in a war in Iraq, we bring many of our American ideals of democracy with us as we fight for freedom in a far-away land.

My experiences in Williamsburg gave me some insights into why Americans still fight for freedom throughout the world. We do not like tyranny or oppression. We want other nations to experience the democracy we enjoy.

Yet it is not always possible to export our way of life as easily as it is to export Pepsi Cola or McDonald's hamburgers. Some areas of the world have never known democracy. Iraq is one of them. It will be difficult to teach Iraqis about democracy when they have never experienced it.

Rebuilding process. Hopefully, the war in Iraq will end soon and the rebuilding process will begin. Just like in the early days of our nation, we must let Iraqis decide their own fate, choose their own leaders, and draft their own form of government. We cannot expect them to imitate us completely.

Let's pray that we don't lose sight of our American ideals as we work with the United Nations and other countries to build a just and lasting peace in Iraq.

Mary C. Uhler, editor

Mailbag

	Mailbag policy We reserve the right to edit or reject letters. Limit letters to 200 words or less. All letters must be signed. Send letters to: Mailbag The Catholic Herald P.O. Box 44985 Madison, WI 53744-4985 Fax: 608-821-3071 E-mail: info@madisoncatholicherald.org

To the editor:

Katherine Brophy's March 13 letter to the editor is all too indicative of the lack of knowledge regarding Catholic teaching on abortion and voting. Ms. Brophy must understand that, except in a case in which a voter is faced with all pro-choice/abortion candidates, a voter who votes for a pro-choice/abortion candidate becomes an accomplice in the moral evil of abortion and thus the voter sins mortally.

Being pro-choice/abortion cannot simply be placed alongside a candidate's other positions on Medicare and unemployment. Moral evils such as abortion, euthanasia, and assisted suicide are examples of "disqualifying issues."

A disqualifying issue is of such gravity and importance that it allows for no political maneuvering. It is an issue of such enormity that by itself renders a candidate for office unacceptable regardless of his or her position on other matters.

When it comes to determining how social and economic policy can best serve the populace, there can be a legitimate variety of approaches and disagreements among voters and candidates. However, a Catholic's duty to help those most needful can never be fulfilled at the price of embracing a "disqualifying issue."

The right to life is a paramount issue because, as Pope John Paul II says, it is "the first right, on which all the others are based, and which cannot be recuperated once it is lost." Most certainly, abortion is a most grievous offense, especially when it comes to the unborn, for surely they are among society's most needful.

Contrary to Ms. Brophy's belief, a true pro-life candidate would not necessarily be in favor of or against all the other issues she lists. This is especially true in the area of capital punishment. It is not correct to think of abortion and the death penalty as the same kind of moral issue. On the one hand, direct abortion is an intrinsic evil and cannot be justified for any purpose or in any circumstance.

On the other hand, the church has always taught that it is the right and responsibility of the legitimate temporal authority to defend and preserve the common good, and more specifically defend citizens against an aggressor. This defense may resort to the death penalty if no other means of defense is sufficient.

Ms. Brophy and the many Catholics like her need to read up on basic Catholic social teaching and understand that, with regard to moral evils, this is not something where they have a choice.

Max Twainer, Madison

President is doing an excellent job

To the editor:

I was recently reading a letter in your mailbag from Jerome Joyce. I have to say I strongly disagree with him on his opinion on how President Bush is handling the war.

I think he is doing an excellent job. Joyce seems to imply that President Bush is somehow Hitler-like in his approach to this conflict. That's an insult to a decent, Christian man. You should be ashamed of trying to make that connection. He is not one bit like Hitler. I don't see how you can compare the two!

I also have to answer Joyce's question on "How are we expected to trust the Bush administration after September 11?" I feel that President Bush rose to the occasion and was exactly what our nation needed at that time. I think he handled the situation with courage and showed genuine sympathy to the families who lost their loved ones.

Secondly, I would like to remind Joyce that we are going to war to free the good people of Iraq from the murderous Saddam Hussein. I would also like to add that I think the Bush administration is doing an outstanding job of protecting our country.

Thank you for letting me state my opinion.

Kaitlyn Ganz, sixth grader, Portage

Pro-gun control not pro-life position

To the editor:

In response to Katherine Brophy's letter in the March 13 issue of The Catholic Herald, I would like to respectfully disagree with a pro-gun control position being a pro-life position.

One has only to look at countries where the strictest gun control laws are in effect to see bewildering increases in violent crime. Coincidence? Look at England. Look at Australia. The law-abiding citizenry in these countries are now unarmed and unable to defend themselves, making them easy pickings for even unarmed criminals.

I have always been puzzled by that euphemism "gun control." Everyone I know who owns and operates a firearm controls his or her gun quite nicely without any need for more laws and regulations. Crooks don't follow the plethora of laws we have now. Adding more laws is a useless waste. I suspect that what proponents of gun control really want is not control but elimination.

For a better understanding of why our founding fathers instituted our constitutional right to keep and bear arms, I recommend a reading of The Federalist Papers and the second amendment. Or better yet, take a survey. I'll bet every burglar in the world is a "gun control" advocate.

Ed Miniatt, Randolph