After last month’s election, many Virginians are uneasy about the future direction of the Old Dominion State. 

With 4 in 10 voters, or 1.4 million people casting their ballot for the Republican candidates, it’s safe to assume that Jan. 17, 2026 will not be met with a collective sigh of relief, but with nearly half of the electorate deeply concerned. 

Admittedly, neither of the two major American political parties are in perfect alignment with Catholic social teaching. Yet, the Democratic Party consistently supports several issues that are wholly incompatible with Catholic moral teaching, for example, on matters concerning the sanctity of human life, the institution of marriage, and on human sexuality. 

On Nov. 4, the Democratic Party swept the executive ticket — governor, lieutenant governor, and attorney general — and made gains in the lower chamber of the General Assembly, ensuring a strong majority there. 

Those victories, along with the Democrats retaining a slim majority in the upper chamber, are more than enough reason for concern for the culture of life in Virginia. Next month, the Democrats will control Richmond and, as a result, they will have the legislative power to pass a radical, anti-life agenda if that’s what they plan to do. 

The Virginia Catholic Conference (VCC) published a resource weeks before the election comparing the executive branch candidates. I encourage everyone to read what VCC reported is Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger’s position on abortion, assisted suicide, conscience rights, and parental rights. Rather than considering all those issues in this essay, I wish to call attention specifically to the governor-elect’s position on physician-assisted suicide (PAS). Catholic News Agency shared this summer a video of Gov.-elect Spanberger — when she was a candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives — explaining her position on PAS and medical conscience rights: 

“So I support and I would support legislation that legalizes the right to die with dignity of a person’s choosing and that would include allowing for medical providers to provide prescriptions for life-ending prescriptions. I oppose the ability of religious institutions to put their religious-based ideas on individuals and their health care choices and options. … I do not believe people should have the option to allow their own personal beliefs to dictate the type of medical care that they are providing their patients.”

Let’s consider the above quote in two distinct parts. Presuming her position hasn’t changed, the first part is the governor-elect’s support for a person’s pseudo “right” to request the means to take his or her own life and to complete that tragic act, as well as for a health care professional to formally cooperate in that blatant suicide — a clear perversion of authentic health care.

According to a recent Gallop poll, public support for PAS may be unfortunately high, as the number of respondents who support it legally (71%), even morally (53%), is well into the majority. Within that majority support is a sobering number of respondents who identify as Catholic (44%), even though the support for PAS shapely declines when their self-reported Catholic Mass attendance moves from never to seldom, from monthly to weekly. 

Yet, regardless of a person’s adherence to the Sunday obligation, the perennial moral teachings of the Catholic Church remain constant. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith teaches in Samaritanus Bonus:

“euthanasia is an intrinsically evil act, in every situation and circumstance … Depending on the circumstances, this practice involves the malice proper to suicide or murder…Those who approve laws of euthanasia and assisted suicide, therefore, become accomplices of a grave sin that others will execute.”

Likewise, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, in “Ethical and Religious Directives,” states, “Suicide and euthanasia are never morally permissible options.” Secondly, and again, presuming her position hasn’t changed, Gov.-elect Spanberger also thinks religiously-informed health care professionals should be forced to acquiesce to a patient’s wishes, even when those wishes are diametrically opposed to their moral beliefs. 

Consider again her own words above in which she rejects conscientious refusal to participate in a patient’s suicide, thereby forcing physicians, for example, to give poison to their patients, rather than to palliate them, should suicide be the patient’s choice. 

According to numerous laws and regulations, the prudential judgments of health care professionals, especially when informed by their deeply held religious beliefs, enjoy robust conscience protections against coercion. Examples include, but are not limited to, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits discrimination based on religion, among others, the Church Amendments and the Coats-Snowe Amendment, which protect health care professionals and students from forced cooperation in direct abortion, and even the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, which protects citizens from religious discrimination imposed by the federal and state governments. Even the most recent bill legalizing physician-assisted suicide in Delaware states, “A health care institution may prohibit a physician or [advanced practice registered nurse] from prescribing medication under this Act on the health care institution’s premises and a physician or APRN may refuse to prescribe medication under this Act.” 

Compound the recorded words of the governor-elect with Lt. Gov.-elect Ghazala Hasmi who was a co-patron (with State Sen. Jennifer Boysko, D-Herndon) of Senate Bill 280 last year in Richmond in a legislative attempt to legalize PAS, and the now reelected five state delegates who were collectively the co-patrons of House Bill 858 for the same purposes, it is increasingly likely that Virginia will soon enter the infamous collective of U.S. jurisdictions that allow their residents to commit suicide under the watchful eye of the doctors whom they trust to do no harm. 

But remember, what may be likely is not certain. Men and women of good will — Catholics and non-Catholic alike — must tirelessly support the right to life of every man, woman, and child, from conception until natural death. We must urge our leaders to reject any attempts to legalize physician-assisted suicide, while at the same time encourage them to pass legislation that extends the reach and increases the efficacy and affordability of ethically-practiced palliative care. We must also pursue legal remedies in the courts when our legislators fail to protect their constituents. 

Authentic health care seeks to manage or, God-willing, eliminate suffering, but never seeks to eliminate the sufferer. We mustn’t give into despair, nor cooperate in the despair of our neighbor. In fact, more than that, we must bring hope where there is despair, as we pray in the Prayer of St. Francis. 

With the election behind us and work to do ahead, we take solace as members of the Mystical Body of Christ. We are Catholics above any political party and we rejoice no matter the state of affairs, for Christ is King!

Editor's note: This story has been updated.