must recognize and guarantee. First among these rights is the inviolable right to life of every innocent human being Citing St. Thomas Aquinas, the Pope acknowledges that the public authority may sometimes choose not to use the law to stop a practice if its prohibition would cause more serious harm. But, this limiting principle can never be invoked to legitimize as an individual legal right an offense against other persons caused by disregard of the fundamental right to life 3U Thus It]he legal toleration of abortion or of euthanasia can in no way claim to be based on respect for the conscience of others, precisely because society has the right and duty to protect itself against the abuses which can occur in the name of conscience and under the pretext of freedom The legal toleration of abortion or euthanasia is, therefore, a violation of a fundamental human right, which runs directly contrary to the state's primary duty of safeguarding human rights. The Pope here relies on John XXIII's discussion of human rights in the encyclical Pacem in Terris. The common good is best safeguarded when personal rights and duties are guaranteed. The chief concern of civil authorities, therefore, must be to ensure that these rights are recognized, respected, coordinated, defended, and promoted In fact to safeguard the inviolable rights of the human person and to facilitate the performance of his duties is the principal duty of every public authority. Thus any government which refused to recognize human rights or acted in violation of them would not only fail in its duty; its decrees would be wholly lacking in binding force The Pope next situates the doctrine of the necessary conformity of the civil law with the moral law within the tradition of the church. Pacem in Terris again provides the relevant precedent Authority is a postulate of the moral order and derives from God. Consequently, laws and decrees enacted in contravention of the moral order. and hence of the divine will can 2 EVANGELIUM VITAE, supra note 4, 1 71(emphasis added See id, citing St. Thomas Aquinas, SUMMA THEOLOGIAE I-Il, q 96, a. 2. See ST. THOMA AQUINAS, TREATISE IN LAW 92 (Regnery Gateway ed, 1979)(The purpose of human law is to lead men to virtue, not suddenly but gradually. Wherefore it does not lay upon the multitude of imperfect men th burdens of those who are already virtuous, viz., that they should abstain from all evil. Otherwise these imperfect ones, being unable to bear such precepts, would break out into still greater evils", if the precepts of a perfect life are poured into imperfect men, "the precepts are despised, and those men, from contempt break out into evils worse still See EvANGELIUM VITAe, supra note 4,171 See id, citing Dignitatis Humanae (7("[C]ivil society has the right to protect itself against possible abuses committed in the name of religious freedom "when those abuses threaten that part of the common good that is called "public order. Id (quoting PACEM IN TERRIS 160-61(the internal quotation is from Pius Xll, radio message of Pentecost 1941(June 1, 1941))
5 must recognize and guarantee.”28 First among these rights is the inviolable right to life of every innocent human being. Citing St. Thomas Aquinas, the Pope acknowledges that the public authority may sometimes choose not to use the law to stop a practice if its prohibition would cause more serious harm.29 But, this limiting principle can never be invoked to legitimize as an individual legal right an offense against other persons caused by disregard of the fundamental right to life.30 Thus: [t]he legal toleration of abortion or of euthanasia can in no way claim to be based on respect for the conscience of others, precisely because society has the right and duty to protect itself against the abuses which can occur in the name of conscience and under the pretext of freedom. 31 The legal toleration of abortion or euthanasia is, therefore, a violation of a fundamental human right, which runs directly contrary to the state’s primary duty of safeguarding human rights. The Pope here relies on John XXIII’s discussion of human rights in the encyclical Pacem in Terris. The common good is best safeguarded when personal rights and duties are guaranteed. The chief concern of civil authorities, therefore, must be to ensure that these rights are recognized, respected, coordinated, defended, and promoted. In fact, ‘to safeguard the inviolable rights of the human person and to facilitate the performance of his duties is the principal duty of every public authority.’ Thus any government which refused to recognize human rights or acted in violation of them would not only fail in its duty; its decrees would be wholly lacking in binding force. 32 The Pope next situates the doctrine of the necessary conformity of the civil law with the moral law within the tradition of the church. Pacem in Terris again provides the relevant precedent: Authority is a postulate of the moral order and derives from God. Consequently, laws and decrees enacted in contravention of the moral order, and hence of the divine will, can 28 EVANGELIUM VITAE, supra note 4, ¶ 71 (emphasis added). 29 See id., citing St. Thomas Aquinas, SUMMA THEOLOGIAE I-II, q. 96, a. 2. See ST. THOMAS AQUINAS, TREATISE IN LAW 92 (Regnery Gateway ed., 1979) (“The purpose of human law is to lead men to virtue, not suddenly but gradually. Wherefore it does not lay upon the multitude of imperfect men the burdens of those who are already virtuous, viz., that they should abstain from all evil. Otherwise these imperfect ones, being unable to bear such precepts, would break out into still greater evils”; if the precepts of a perfect life are poured into imperfect men, “the precepts are despised, and those men, from contempt, break out into evils worse still.”). 30 See EVANGELIUM VITAE, supra note 4, ¶ 71. 31 See id., citing Dignitatis Humanae ¶ 7 (“[C]ivil society has the right to protect itself against possible abuses committed in the name of religious freedom” when those abuses threaten that part of the common good that is called “public order.”). 32 Id. (quoting PACEM IN TERRIS ¶ 60-61 (the internal quotation is from Pius XII, radio message of Pentecost 1941 (June 1, 1941)))
have no binding force in conscience. .. indeed, the passing of such laws undermines the very nature of authority and results in shameful abuse Pacem in Terris here is relying on the authority of both Scripture and St. Thomas Since the right to command is required by the moral order and has its source in God, it follows that, if civil authorities pass laws or command anything opposed to the moral order and consequently contrary to the will of God, neither the laws made nor the authorization granted can be binding on the consciences of the citizens, since"God has more right to be obeyed than men Human law has the true nature of law only in so far as it corresponds to right reason, and in this respect it is evident that it is derived from the eternal law. In so far as it falls short of right reason, a law is said to be a wicked unjust]law; and so, lacking the true nature of law it is rather a kind of violence. John Paul ll concludes his discussion of the church's understanding of the doctrine of the conformity between the civil law and the moral law with another quote from Thomas who himself was borrowing from Augustine: [elvery law made by man can be called a law insofar as it derives from the natural law. But if it is somehow opposed to the natural law, then it is not really a law but rather a corruption of law. 36 The Pope then applies this doctrine to laws authorizing and promoting abort and euthanasia. Because such laws disregard the fundamental right to life-the source of all other rights-they are radically opposed both to the good of the individual and the common good, which it is the duty of the public authority to safeguard As such [these laws] are completely lacking in authentic juridical validity. Disregard for the right to life, precisely because it leads to the killing of the person whom society exists to serve, is what most directly conflicts with the possibility of achieving the common good. Consequently, a civil law authorizing abortion or euthanasia ceases by that very fact to be a true, morally binding civil law Abortion and euthanasia are in fact crimes that no human law can legitimize Because these acts are intrinsically unjust, laws permitting abortion or euthanasia can neither be licitly obeyed nor supported or voted for. " [A] law which violates an innocent person's natural right to life is unjust and, as such, is not valid as law. 8"There is ld.172 (quoting PACEM IN TERRIS 51) 34 Id(quoting Acts 5: 29) SUMMA THEOLOGIAE, I-ll, q. 93, a. 3, ad. 2. Pacem in Terris also cites Radio Message of Pius Xll, Christmas Eve, 1944, Acta Apostolica Sedis XXXVll, 1945, pp 5-23 EVANGELIUM VITAE, supra note 4,172( quoting SUMMA THEOLOGIAE, I-I, q. 95, a 2, c) Thomas is here quoting Augustine, De Libero Arbitrio 1, 5, 11(Non videtur esse lex, quae iusta non 37 See EVANGELIUM VITAE, supra note 4,172 ld at190
6 have no binding force in conscience . . . ; indeed, the passing of such laws undermines the very nature of authority and results in shameful abuse. 33 Pacem in Terris here is relying on the authority of both Scripture and St. Thomas: Since the right to command is required by the moral order and has its source in God, it follows that, if civil authorities pass laws or command anything opposed to the moral order and consequently contrary to the will of God, neither the laws made nor the authorization granted can be binding on the consciences of the citizens, since “God has more right to be obeyed than men.”34 Human law has the true nature of law only in so far as it corresponds to right reason, and in this respect it is evident that it is derived from the eternal law. In so far as it falls short of right reason, a law is said to be a wicked [unjust] law; and so, lacking the true nature of law, it is rather a kind of violence. 35 John Paul II concludes his discussion of the church’s understanding of the doctrine of the conformity between the civil law and the moral law with another quote from Thomas, who himself was borrowing from Augustine: “[e]very law made by man can be called a law insofar as it derives from the natural law. But if it is somehow opposed to the natural law, then it is not really a law but rather a corruption of law.”36 The Pope then applies this doctrine to laws authorizing and promoting abortion and euthanasia. Because such laws disregard the fundamental right to life – the source of all other rights – they are radically opposed both to the good of the individual and the common good, which it is the duty of the public authority to safeguard: As such [these laws] are completely lacking in authentic juridical validity. Disregard for the right to life, precisely because it leads to the killing of the person whom society exists to serve, is what most directly conflicts with the possibility of achieving the common good. Consequently, a civil law authorizing abortion or euthanasia ceases by that very fact to be a true, morally binding civil law. 37 Abortion and euthanasia are, in fact, crimes that no human law can legitimize. Because these acts are intrinsically unjust, laws permitting abortion or euthanasia can neither be licitly obeyed nor supported or voted for. “[A] law which violates an innocent person’s natural right to life is unjust and, as such, is not valid as law.”38 “There is no 33 Id. ¶ 72 (quoting PACEM IN TERRIS ¶ 51). 34 Id. (quoting Acts 5:29). 35 SUMMA THEOLOGIAE, I-II, q. 93, a. 3, ad. 2. Pacem in Terris also cites Radio Message of Pius XII, Christmas Eve, 1944, Acta Apostolica Sedis XXXVII, 1945, pp. 5-23. 36 EVANGELIUM VITAE, supra note 4, ¶ 72 (quoting SUMMA THEOLOGIAE, I-II, q. 95, a. 2, c). Thomas is here quoting Augustine, De Libero Arbitrio I, 5, 11 (“Non videtur esse lex, quae iusta non fuerit.”). 37 See EVANGELIUM VITAE, supra note 4, ¶ 72. 38 Id. at ¶ 90
obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead, there is a grave and clear obligat to oppose them by conscientious objection A conscientious legislator could however. vote in favor of a more restrictive abortion law, in place of a more permissive one already in force Then it is not possible to overturn or completely abrogate a pro-abortion law, an elected official whose absolute personal opposition to procured abortion was well known could licitly support proposals aimed at limiting the harm done by such a law and at lessening its negative consequences at the level of general opinion and public morality This does not in fact represent an illicit cooperation with an unjust law, but rather a legitimate and proper attempt to limit its evil aspects.40 The task of the legislator thus involves a complex and morally precarious balancing act. Without falling into an illicit cooperation with evil, the Pope calls on civil leaders to "make courageous choices in support of life, especially through legislative measures. Those who have a legislative or decision-making mandate. also have a responsibility "to answer to God, to his or her conscience and to the whole of society for choices which may be contrary to the common good. While the Pope recognizes that sometimes decisive role in influencing patterns of thought and behavior portant and laws are not the only means available to protect life, they do play a very in Legislators. therefore have a two-fold task. In the face of the difficulties hindering an effective legal defense of life in pluralistic democracies, they must work to remove unjust laws that, "by disregarding the dignity of the human person, undermine the very fabric of society. At the same time, they must work to eliminate the underlying social causes of attacks on life, as they seek to do what is"realistically attainable " in pursuit of the"re-establishment of a just order"in defense of life civil law and the moral law in a February 2000 address commemorating memibveen the The Pope reiterated his commitment to this vision of the relationship be anniversary of Evangelium vitae. After noting that he considers this encyclical"central to the whole magisterium of [his]pontificate, the Pope criticized the"type of defeatist mentality" that claims that laws opposed to the right to life- those which legalize 39 Id at 73 ld. The Pope goes on in paragraph 74 to recall the general principles concerning cooperation in evil actions M. Cathleen Kaveny, The Limits of Ordinary Virtue: The Limits of the Criminal La in Implementing Evangelium Vitae, in CHOOSING LIFE, supra note 7, at 133. [hereinafter The Limits of Iry Virtue] Id (quoting EvANGELIum vitae 9 See id supra note 41,190 ld See John Paul Il, Civil Law, Morality and the Right to life, Address of Pope John Paul ll at the Commemoration of the Fifth Anniversary of the Encyclical Evangelium vitae(Feb 14, 2000). in 45 THE POPE SPEAKS 271-73(Sept.-Oct. 2000)[hereinafter Civil LaI
7 obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead, there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection.”39 A conscientious legislator could, however, vote in favor of a more restrictive abortion law, in place of a more permissive one already in force: [W]hen it is not possible to overturn or completely abrogate a pro-abortion law, an elected official whose absolute personal opposition to procured abortion was well known could licitly support proposals aimed at limiting the harm done by such a law and at lessening its negative consequences at the level of general opinion and public morality. This does not in fact represent an illicit cooperation with an unjust law, but rather a legitimate and proper attempt to limit its evil aspects. 40 The task of the legislator thus “involves a complex and morally precarious balancing act.”41 Without falling into an illicit cooperation with evil, the Pope calls on civil leaders to “make courageous choices in support of life, especially through legislative measures.”42 Those who have a legislative or decision-making mandate, also have a responsibility “to answer to God, to his or her conscience and to the whole of society for choices which may be contrary to the common good.”43 While the Pope recognizes that laws are not the only means available to protect life, “they do play a very important and sometimes decisive role in influencing patterns of thought and behavior.”44 Legislators, therefore, have a two-fold task. In the face of the difficulties hindering an effective legal defense of life in pluralistic democracies, they must work to remove unjust laws that, “by disregarding the dignity of the human person, undermine the very fabric of society.”45 At the same time, they must work to eliminate the underlying social causes of attacks on life, as they seek to do what is “realistically attainable” in pursuit of the “re-establishment of a just order” in defense of life.46 The Pope reiterated his commitment to this vision of the relationship between the civil law and the moral law in a February 2000 address commemorating the fifth anniversary of Evangelium Vitae. 47 After noting that he considers this encyclical “central to the whole magisterium of [his] pontificate,” the Pope criticized the “type of defeatist mentality” that “claims that laws opposed to the right to life – those which legalize 39 Id. at ¶ 73. 40 Id. The Pope goes on in paragraph 74 to recall the general principles concerning cooperation in evil actions. 41 M. Cathleen Kaveny, The Limits of Ordinary Virtue: The Limits of the Criminal Law in Implementing Evangelium Vitae, in CHOOSING LIFE, supra note 7, at 133. [hereinafter The Limits of Ordinary Virtue]. 42 Id. (quoting EVANGELIUM VITAE ¶ 90). 43 See id. supra note 41, ¶ 90. 44 Id. 45 Id. 46 Id. 47 See John Paul II, Civil Law, Morality and the Right to Life, Address of Pope John Paul II at the Commemoration of the Fifth Anniversary of the Encyclical Evangelium Vitae (Feb. 14, 2000), in 45 THE POPE SPEAKS 271-73 (Sept.-Oct. 2000) [hereinafter Civil Law]
abortion, euthanasia, sterilization and methods of family planning opposed to life and the dignity of marriage- are inevitable and now almost a social necessity In the face of this defeatist mentality, the Pope argues that the chapters of Evangelium Vitae addressing the relationship between the civil law and the moral law deserve great attention because of the growing importance they are destined to have in the restoration of social life Pastors, the faithful and people of goodwill, especially if they are lawmakers, are asked for a renewed and united commitment to change unjust laws that legitimize or tolerate such violence. No effort should be spared to eliminate legalized crime or at least to limit the damage caused by these laws Returning to a theme he highlighted in Evangelium Vitae itself, the Pope also recognizes that building a new culture of life requires affirmative pastoral and educational efforts, not simply legal prohibitions of activities opposed to the right to life An authentic apostolate of life requires catechesis and conscience formation, as wel the provision of services that will enable anyone in trouble to find the necessary help These activities cannot be separated from legal change The changing of laws must be preceded and accompanied by the changing of mentalities and morals on a vast scale, in an extensive and visible way. In this area the Church will spare no effort nor can she accept negligence or guilty silence Thus, the Pope makes an appeal to the whole church to become engaged in the apostolate of life "to scientists and doctors to teachers and families. as well as to those who work in the media, and especially to jurists and lawmakers Summary of the Jurisprudential Vision of John Paul Il The Pope's call for a recovery of the basic elements of a vision of the relationship between the civil law and the moral law is rooted in his sense that legal attacks on life flow from an ethical relativism pervading much of contemporary culture. This relativism leads to an idolization of democracy divorced from a conviction that the moral value of 48lat271-72 49 1d. at 272-73(emphasis added) See EvANGLEIuM VITAe, supra note 4,190 It is not enough to remove unjust laws. The underlying causes of attacks on life have to be eliminated, especially by ensuring proper support for families and motherhood. A family policy must be the basis and driving force of all social policies. For this reason there must be set in place social and political initiatives capable of guaranteeing conditions of true freedom of choice in matters of parenthood. It is also necessary to rethink labor, urban, residential and social service policies so as to harmonize working schedules with time available for the family, so that it becomes possible to take care of children and the elderly o2 John Paul Il, Civil Law, supra note 47, at 273(emphasis added)
8 abortion, euthanasia, sterilization and methods of family planning opposed to life and the dignity of marriage – are inevitable and now almost a social necessity.”48 In the face of this defeatist mentality, the Pope argues that the chapters of Evangelium Vitae addressing the relationship between the civil law and the moral law “deserve great attention because of the growing importance they are destined to have in the restoration of social life”: Pastors, the faithful and people of goodwill, especially if they are lawmakers, are asked for a renewed and united commitment to change unjust laws that legitimize or tolerate such violence. No effort should be spared to eliminate legalized crime or at least to limit the damage caused by these laws . . . .49 Returning to a theme he highlighted in Evangelium Vitae itself,50 the Pope also recognizes that building a new culture of life requires affirmative pastoral and educational efforts, not simply legal prohibitions of activities opposed to the right to life. An authentic apostolate of life requires catechesis and conscience formation, as well as the provision of services that will enable anyone in trouble to find the necessary help.51 These activities cannot be separated from legal change: The changing of laws must be preceded and accompanied by the changing of mentalities and morals on a vast scale, in an extensive and visible way. In this area the Church will spare no effort nor can she accept negligence or guilty silence. 52 Thus, the Pope makes an appeal to the whole church to become engaged in the apostolate of life: “to scientists and doctors, to teachers and families, as well as to those who work in the media, and especially to jurists and lawmakers.”53 Summary of the Jurisprudential Vision of John Paul II The Pope’s call for a recovery of the basic elements of a vision of the relationship between the civil law and the moral law is rooted in his sense that legal attacks on life flow from an ethical relativism pervading much of contemporary culture. This relativism leads to an idolization of democracy divorced from a conviction that the moral value of 48 Id. at 271-72. 49 Id. at 272-73 (emphasis added). 50 See EVANGLEIUM VITAE, supra note 4, ¶ 90: [I]t is not enough to remove unjust laws. The underlying causes of attacks on life have to be eliminated, especially by ensuring proper support for families and motherhood. A family policy must be the basis and driving force of all social policies. For this reason there must be set in place social and political initiatives capable of guaranteeing conditions of true freedom of choice in matters of parenthood. It is also necessary to rethink labor, urban, residential and social service policies so as to harmonize working schedules with time available for the family, so that it becomes possible to take care of children and the elderly. 51 See id. ¶ 88. 52 John Paul II, Civil Law, supra note 47, at 273 (emphasis added). 53 Id
democracy depends on the morality of the ends it pursues and the means chosen to pursue hose ends The objective moral law -the natural law written on every human heart-must serve as the obligatory point of reference for civil law itself. This objective moral law serves fundamentally to articulate essential values that flow from the very truth of human being and that express and safeguard the dignity of every human person. The civil law serves a limited purpose in relationship to this moral law -it ensures the common good through the recognition and defense of fundamental human rights and the promotion of ordered social existence in peace and true justice First among the fundamental human rights that positive civil law must recognize, respect, guarantee, and promote is the inviolable right to life of every innocent human being. The legal toleration of abortion or euthanasia is therefore an abdication of the state's primary duty to safeguard human rights through law. Civil laws that contravene the moral order are unjust, conflict with the possibility of achieving the common good, lack the true nature of law, and have no binding force in conscience. Consequently, a civil law authorizing abortion or euthanasia ceases by that very fact to be a true, morally binding civil law Lawmakers have a duty in conscience to work to remove such unjust laws, or at ast to strive to restrict such practices through less permissive laws than those currently in force. While doing whatever is reasonably attainable in pursuit of the re- establishment of a just order in defense of life, lawmakers must, at the same time, work to enact social policies that will help to eliminate the underlying causes of attacks on life relationship between the moral law and the civil law in a religiously pluralistic sociep b Clearly, a number of significant and interrelated questions must be taken seriousl by anyone seeking to heed the Pope s call to recover the basic elements of a vision of the 1. What can we reasonably expect the civil law to do in the absence of moral consensus in a pluralistic society? 4 Does law shape culture or does culture shape law ?55 See McCormick, supra note 8, at 10-17. In the face of moral dissensus regarding the moral status of the fetus, for example, McCormick notes that"public policy will remain sharply contentious and the task of legislators correspondingly complex. Indeed a strong case can be made that the attempt to solve the.,. problem [of divergent evaluations of the status of the fetus] by legislation bypasses our duty to persuade, to change hearts and minds. ld. at 13 See David Hollenbach, S.J., The Gospel of life and the Culture of Death: A Response to John Conley, in CHOOSING LIFE, supra note 8, at 37-45. Hollenbach concludes that the law "must generally follow the cultural consensus rather than lead or form it. He holds this view not out of skepticism or sullen tolerance, which he sees as deadly characteristics of our public philosophy and culture that he joins the Pope in criticizing. Instead, his conclusion flows from a"hope that the route of education and ikely to improve the moral quality of our culture than is a premature reach for law, which remains coercive even when it intends to be educative. Americans are likely to be suspicious of the ntrusion of the coercive arm of the state into areas where they experience moral uncertainty. Such suspicion is not likely to result in conversion of the culture. ld. at 43-44. C. John Paul ll, Civil La, supra note 47, at 273 (stating that vast change in"mentalities and morals"must"precede[ and accompany] ange
9 democracy depends on the morality of the ends it pursues and the means chosen to pursue those ends. The objective moral law – the natural law written on every human heart – must serve as the obligatory point of reference for civil law itself. This objective moral law serves fundamentally to articulate essential values that flow from the very truth of human being and that express and safeguard the dignity of every human person. The civil law serves a limited purpose in relationship to this moral law – it ensures the common good through the recognition and defense of fundamental human rights and the promotion of ordered social existence in peace and true justice. First among the fundamental human rights that positive civil law must recognize, respect, guarantee, and promote is the inviolable right to life of every innocent human being. The legal toleration of abortion or euthanasia is therefore an abdication of the state’s primary duty to safeguard human rights through law. Civil laws that contravene the moral order are unjust, conflict with the possibility of achieving the common good, lack the true nature of law, and have no binding force in conscience. Consequently, a civil law authorizing abortion or euthanasia ceases by that very fact to be a true, morally binding civil law. Lawmakers have a duty in conscience to work to remove such unjust laws, or at the very least to strive to restrict such practices through less permissive laws than those currently in force. While doing whatever is reasonably attainable in pursuit of the reestablishment of a just order in defense of life, lawmakers must, at the same time, work to enact social policies that will help to eliminate the underlying causes of attacks on life. Clearly, a number of significant and interrelated questions must be taken seriously by anyone seeking to heed the Pope’s call to recover the basic elements of a vision of the relationship between the moral law and the civil law in a religiously pluralistic society: 1. What can we reasonably expect the civil law to do in the absence of moral consensus in a pluralistic society?54 Does law shape culture or does culture shape law?55 54 See McCormick, supra note 8, at 10-17. In the face of moral dissensus regarding the moral status of the fetus, for example, McCormick notes that “public policy will remain sharply contentious and the task of legislators correspondingly complex. Indeed a strong case can be made that the attempt to solve the . . . problem [of divergent evaluations of the status of the fetus] by legislation bypasses our duty to persuade, to change hearts and minds.” Id. at 13. 55 See David Hollenbach, S.J., The Gospel of Life and the Culture of Death: A Response to John Conley, in CHOOSING LIFE, supra note 8, at 37-45. Hollenbach concludes that the law “must generally follow the cultural consensus rather than lead or form it.” He holds this view not out of skepticism or “sullen tolerance,” which he sees as deadly characteristics of our public philosophy and culture that he joins the Pope in criticizing. Instead, his conclusion flows from a “hope that the route of education and persuasion is more likely to improve the moral quality of our culture than is a premature reach for law, which remains coercive even when it intends to be educative.” Americans are likely to be suspicious of the intrusion of the coercive arm of the state into areas where they experience moral uncertainty. Such suspicion is not likely to result in conversion of the culture. Id. at 43-44. Cf. John Paul II, Civil Law, supra note 47, at 273 (stating that vast change in “mentalities and morals” must “precede[ ] and accompan[y]” legal change)