You Wouldn't Even Ask -- Why We Must Vote Pro-Life First

by Father Frank Pavone

If a candidate who supported terrorism asked for your vote, would you say, "I disagree with you on terrorism, but where do you stand on other issues?"

I doubt it.

In fact, if a terrorism sympathizer presented him/herself for your vote, you would immediately know that such a position disqualifies the candidate for public office -- no matter how good he or she may be on other issues. The horror of terrorism dwarfs whatever good might be found in the candidate's plan for housing, education, or health care. Regarding those plans, you wouldn't even ask.

So why do so many people say, "This candidate favors legal abortion. I disagree. But I'm voting for this person because she has good ideas about health care (or some other issue)."

Such a position makes no sense whatsoever, unless one is completely blind to the violence of abortion. That, of course, is the problem. But we need only see what abortion looks like, or read descriptions from the abortionists themselves, and the evidence is clear. (USA Today refused to sell me space for an ad that quoted abortionists describing their work because the readers would be traumatized just by the words!)

Abortion is no less violent than terrorism. Any candidate who says abortion should be kept legal disqualifies him/herself from public service. We need look no further, we need pay no attention to what that candidate says on other issues. Support for abortion is enough for us to decide not to vote for such a person.

Pope John Paul II put it this way: "Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights -- for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture -- is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination" (Christifideles Laici, 1988).

Read the entire article at:

bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), March 30, 2004

Answers

article is at: http://www.lifenews.com/na t411.html

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), March 30, 2004.

Good old Father Pavone has pointed out a most important reality. Those who think that it is okay to vote for abortionists because of some other issue of social policy they like are displaying their true colours: they really don't think abortion is that big of a deal.

That is a solvable problem. Show the pictures!

Dano

P.S.: Bill, I don't always respond to your link threads, but I read every one, and they are always of interest to me. Keep up the good work.

-- Dan Garon (boethius61@yahoo.com), March 30, 2004.

Well, OTOH, one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. Now if someone said they were *for terrorism*, I'd be quite shocked. I'd ALSO be shocked if a Presidential candidate said they were *FOR abortion*. I would NOT be shocked if they used some euphamism like "for choice", or "for the right to choose", but doubt if any of them have the spine to admit they are FOR abortion in their national campaign.

Personally though, I'd say if someone really IS for abortion, they are most likely for a host of other things that are also morally wrong, so you could take your pick on why not to vote for them.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), March 30, 2004.

Frank said, "Well, OTOH, one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter."

Watch out, Frank that is not true. A terrorist intentionally targets innocent civilians to instill fear into the population so they force their governments to yield to terrorist demands.

Freedom fighters target their opponent's military industrial complex.

Completely different animals… sorry to nick-pick

In Christ, Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), March 30, 2004.

bump on request

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), April 13, 2004.