Volume > Issue > The "Catholic" Politician of 2001 & The Southern "Gentleman" of 1860

The “Catholic” Politician of 2001 & The Southern “Gentleman” of 1860

IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE?

By John L. Botti | October 2001
John L. Botti, a member of the Bar of the State of New York, is a retired associate professor of law at Seton Hall University in New Jersey.

No explanation is needed for what follows.

The “Catholic” Politician of 2001: “I am not in favor of abortion; indeed, personally I am opposed to it. But I do not feel it is my place to impose my convictions upon anyone else!”

The Southern “Gentleman” of 1860: “I am not in favor of slavery; indeed, personally I am opposed to it. But I do not feel it is my place to impose my convictions upon anyone else!”

+ +

The “Catholic” Politician of 2001: “I am not pro-abortion! I am pro-choice! I favor leaving the decision up to the woman and the woman alone. It is her decision — and no one else’s.”

The Southern “Gentleman” of 1860: “I am not pro-slavery! I am pro-choice! I favor leaving the decision up to the slaveholder and to him alone. It is his decision — and no one else’s.”

Enjoyed reading this?

READ MORE! REGISTER TODAY

SUBSCRIBE

You May Also Enjoy

The Weight of Anchises

A descendant of the South asks: How do we properly reckon with our own families’ participation in historical racial injustice?

Not the Whole Story

Review of Race by Studs Terkel

Political Correctness Is Doomed

The politically correct outlook gave rise to a new religion, which may be defined as militant relativism, sanctimonious and intolerant toward those who deviate from it.