Pro-Life & Pro-War?
Fr. Frank Pavone, prior to the midterm elections in November 2006, issued a voter’s guide called “Ten Easy Steps to…Voting With a Clear Conscience.” He says it is “non-partisan.”
Fr. Pavone is a great prolife leader, and he says: “Any candidate who says abortion should be kept legal disqualifies him/herself from public service…. Support for abortion is enough for us to decide not to vote for such a person.” But then he makes an about-face: “What happens if two opposing candidates both support abortion?… Then just ask a simple question: Which of the two candidates will do less harm to unborn children if elected?” He says: “This is not ‘choosing the lesser of two evils.’ We may never choose evil. But…you would not be choosing evil. Why? Because in choosing to limit an evil, you are choosing a good.” Who knows what that means?
Then he says: “Sometimes people vote according to the party of the candidate, perhaps because that’s a family tradition…. But when is the last time you read the words of the platform of that party?” We all know he is referring to the Democratic Party, which is pro-abortion.
Section seven is titled: “Remember, the Party Matters.” We will quote the whole section:
Voting with a clear conscience also means that you consider how the outcome of the election in which you vote affects the balance of power. In other words, elections do not only put individual candidates into power; they put political parties into power. And it is not only the candidates who have positions. So do the parties.
The same questions, then, that you ask about the candidates’ positions on fundamental issues have to be asked of the party. What is the platform of that party? Is it possible that the balance of power [from Republicans who now control Congress to the Democrats] might shift as a result of the outcome of this particular race? Keep in mind that the party that is in power controls the committees responsible for initiating legislation. A pro-abortion party will not normally allow pro-life legislation to come forward, no matter how pro-life the individual lawmakers may be. Do not just look at whether the candidate is pro-life. Consider whether or not, if he or she wins, the pro-abortion party will come into power.
Repeating: “Do not just look at whether the candidate is pro-life. Consider whether or not, if he or she wins, the pro-abortion party will come into power.” But what about Pavone’s statement that “Any candidate who says abortion should be kept legal disqualifies him/herself from public service…. Support for abortion is enough for us to decide not to vote for such a person.” It is basically negated, and you can vote for a pro-abortion candidate as long as he is a Republican.
Enjoyed reading this?
READ MORE! REGISTER TODAYSUBSCRIBE
You May Also Enjoy
To what extent can a political or value system “have its way” when confronted by an informed and resolute Catholic conscience?
The fact that some arguments against strategic nuclear deterrence are faulty does not permit the conclusion that there are no compelling moral arguments against it.
Deterrence advocates acknowledge the intrinsic balefulness of war but argue nonetheless that the possibility of war is ever-present.