Hypothetical Election

[Didymus]

because we have no tangible way of preventing the deaths of the innocent right at this moment save from using physical force. Prayer is always necessary, but I always believe in voting against the one who is blatantly pro-death. If there is a candidate that is willing to change the law for the better and he/she actually has a shot of winning, then I'd be willing to give them my vote. You have every right to call me out, cuz I might very well be wrong . That's just the way I see it. I'm looking at it from the current state of the country, not if I would actually stand next to that particular candidate's platform and support it, because I actually do want a candidate who is 100% pro-life no exceptions. (just wanted to clarify where I am myself)

Edited February 11, 2007 by Didymus

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='Veritas' post='1191013' date='Feb 10 2007, 07:28 PM']
+

His name is Brownback.
[/quote]

Yay, Brownback! He's my senator!!!

Abortion isn't the only one of the non-negotiable issues. If there wasn't a pro-life candidate, I'd vote for the one that was the most suitable when it came to gay marriage and cloning (the candidates would probably be against all of the other ones...). The Voter's Guide for Serious Catholics helps a lot...just saying that you dont have to take your vote out or vote for a third party candidate if neither the republican or democrat candidates are pro life.

Edited February 11, 2007 by aalpha1989

[goldenchild17]

Not trying to call anyone out. Just trying to figure out hte right course of action in the matter. In the case of a serial killer who has taken a group hostage: he offers to let the rest of the group live if we allow for the deaths of a few of them. Either some will die, or all will die, no other alternative. Is it okay to support the murder of the few?

In the case of a presidential candidate who is against abortion in most cases, but supports it in some cases: he offers the country a relief against the murder of many unborn children. In exchange he asks for our support in allowing the deaths of many unborn children still in certain circumstances. EIther some will die, or many more will die, many unborn children will die regardless. To add onto this, he also supports birth control. Is it okay to support such a candidate simply because it's better to kill some than to kill many?