Opinion
Featured Image
 Shutterstock

The country is in severe distress, and we need a strong leader to solve the nation’s problems. Here are the reasons—reading from the pamphlet left in your mailbox—why you should vote for this candidate:

  1. He is a charismatic, very inspiring orator
  2. His great knowledge of economics will help him lead us out of this depression and ensure full employment
  3. His infectious personal warmth and friendliness will raise the national morale
  4. He will build the country’s military to the level of world’s most powerful
  5. He has a clear strategy to win back territories once part of this country
  6. He will improve the educational system in all the states
  7. He will adjust the tax system to attract world corporations  and investors
  8. He will unify the country’s native people by extermination of those racially impure, the non-Arians

Of course, those morally sane would be horrified by “Issue” #8. Imagine, though, if you are in the company of friends or acquaintances and make known your repugnance for this candidate. Would you not be in total shock if anyone were to say something like, “Oh, yes, you may not agree with Issue #8, but look at all of the other positive aspects of his candidacy; he’s so superior to his opponent!”

In historical perspective we easily see how absurd this argument is for a Hitler vote. Yet, we find ourselves hearing the same pleas today when we change Issue #8 above to: “Will protect a woman’s absolute right to control her own body,” or a similar phrase. If you declare yourself to be pro-life, you are sometimes labeled a one-issue voter, a social conservative, or even a religious fanatic.

I recently found myself, in this mid-term election, faced with a dilemma: Both the Republican nominees for U.S. senator and for governor in my state—despite the national party’s pro-life platform—were proudly “pro-choice.” Of course, the two Democrat counterparts were not only pro-aborts but also favored socialistic economic policies and other “issues” with which I disagreed.

What did I do?

I voted for the only pro-life Republican candidate on the ballot for a major office—Congressman—and then for Republicans for the remaining minor offices (Register of Deeds, Sheriff, etc.).  I LEFT BLANK the box next to the candidate for governor and, on the U.S. senator line, printed in the name of the pro-life candidate who had lost in the primary to the “pro-choice” one because of huge amounts of money sent to the latter by the national Republican Party, a story for another day.

I believe that a key reason we are trapped and pressured into having to hold our noses and vote for pro-choice candidates, deemed “the lesser of the two evils,” is because of language trickery: Why do we continue to trivialize abortion, by calling it an “issue”? It is not!  Opposition to the execution of children in the womb is a premise of human civilization. Admit it or not, to be “pro-choice” is to be a barbarian, like someone during the 1930s in Germany favoring genocide, and worse than someone in ante-bellum America favoring slavery; at least slaves were alive and could hope for freedom.

The above common-sense thesis should be obvious to any loyal LifeSiteNews reader, but what more can we all do? First, refuse to vote for any pro-abortion candidate, despite the perception that a worse person might be elected, and make your decision known to your friends and to the local and national Republican committees, especially if you receive solicitations for funds. Second, don’t let anyone call abortion an “issue”; speak up and take the hits. Third, contact your bishop and pastor, urging them to remind Catholics that they can never vote for pro-abortion candidates. If they express fear about loss of tax exemption or violation of some phony concept of church-state separation, inform them that a violation occurs only when a church endorses for an office by naming a specific candidate. It is a major scandal that a majority of Catholics regularly vote for candidates who either directly support abortion or who whimper “I’m personally opposed, but…”  Fourth, pray.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.