I agree with djs that the response of the Church to those who are pro-abortion and still pretend to be Catholic has been disproportionately mild.
You changed my question entirely, of course.
I am challenging the conviction of laity and clergy who do so litttle in terms of direct action to end abortion. When, for example, glib comparisions are made to the Nazi holocaust, but no action is taken that entails risk, then I question the conviction. I don't doubt for a moment the ease with which we can risklessly see and criticize fault in others.
Here again you shift completely - from what a voter should do to what Church disciplinarians should do. As to political strategies, it is naive in the extreme to think that the way to achieve objectives is to adhere to a direct path. Or to discount the posturing that is inherent to the process, with tyranny of public opinion, that we have created.
And this is where Bishop Sheridan's message is weak. What is God's law on poltics? What does it mean "supporting", "to advocate", "to promote"... A candidate that has an abortion, procures an abortion, praises an act of abortion may certainly be unambiguously be said to "defy God's law". But a vote?
The conflating of the moral dimension of abortion, which is totally unambiguous, with the political action, which is murky at best, is a great way to dilute the power of one's voice of moral authority, and to cause rather than alleviate confusion.
