Robert George—Roman Catholics Should Criticize Indiscriminate Drone Use

Posted by Kendall Harmon

The use of drones is not, in my opinion, inherently immoral in otherwise justifiable military operations; but the risks of death and other grave harms to noncombatants are substantial and certainly complicate the picture for any policy maker who is serious about the moral requirements for the justified use of military force. Having a valid military target is in itself not a sufficient justification for the use of weapons such as predator drones. Sometimes considerations of justice to noncombatants forbid their use, even if that means that grave risks must be endured by our own forces in the prosecution of a war.

Read it all.

Filed under: * Culture-WatchReligion & Culture* Economics, PoliticsDefense, National Security, MilitaryForeign RelationsPolitics in General* Religion News & CommentaryOther ChurchesRoman Catholic* TheologyEthics / Moral Theology

Posted June 18, 2012 at 12:05 pm

To comment on this article: Go to Article View

The URL for this article is

1. Dan Crawford wrote:

I’m afraid the Catholic bishops are busy trying to enhance religious freedom by working hard to get Mr. Romney elected. War and peace, and economic justice used to be their concerns.

June 18, 1:58 pm | [comment link]
2. David Keller wrote:

The RC bishops had a deal with Obama and he broke it. He did it to get their support for Obamacare, and then broke the deal as soon as it suited his political agenda. The RC’s wouldn’t be involved in anything but peace and justice if Obama wasn’t runnung rough shod over the 1st Amendment. For a “constituional expert” he doesn’t seem to know or care much about the constitution; or for keeping his promises.

June 18, 4:23 pm | [comment link]
3. driver8 wrote:

That’s helped. De-politicize by immediately making a partisan point. “Rara my guy.” “Booo your guy”.

June 18, 4:24 pm | [comment link]
4. David Keller wrote:

#3 Not sure who are directing your comment to. Obama politicized this issue when he didnt have to. He assumed the Catlholoc Church would roll over. Bad decision. But it effects all of us. If O can ignore the first Amendment for Catholics he can ignore for anyone. For the RCs this is not about politics, it’s about religion (as opposed to TEC, where everything is about politics an never about religion). What part of the Bill of Rights is it OK for the president to ignore? I would say not any. If the 1st Amendment is bad, there is a CONSTITUTIONAL means to repeal it.

June 18, 6:29 pm | [comment link]
5. driver8 wrote:

When I drafted my comment only #1 had been posted. My general point is that if one is successfully to critique the Catholic Bishops for being merely partisan, one ought to be slightly self conscious about appearing merely partisan oneself.

June 18, 7:23 pm | [comment link]

© 2014 Kendall S. Harmon. All rights reserved.

For original material from Titusonenine (such as articles and commentary by Dr. Harmon) permission to copy and distribute free of charge is granted, provided this notice, the logo, and the web site address are visible on all copies. For permission for use in for-profit publications, please email KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com

<< Back to main page

<< Return to Mobile view (headlines)