The Truth About Voting for President Bush and Grave Sin
But Ms. Kralis then commented that "Bush is trying to ‘limit the harm’ more than his opponent...."
A casual reader of Ms. Kralis' article might erroneously conclude that the difference between President Bush and Senator Kerry on abortion is less than enormous, that President Bush flip-flops on abortion (instead of consistently favoring exceptions for rape and incest and refusing to use a litmus test in making judicial appointments), and that Senator Kerry IS trying to "limit the harm" from abortion, albeit not as much as President.Each of those conclusions would be wrong.
On March 12, 2004, Kerry for President issued a press release complaining that "[a]t a UNESCAP meeting in Bangkok, Thailand in 2002, the U.S. delegation fought to change language in a landmark international reproductive health care agreement and advanced a position that life begins at conception."
Catholic News Service now acknowledges that there is no issue on which the distinction between Bush and Kerry is clearer than abortion.
It credits President Bush with signing the partial-birth abortion ban and defending it in court; signing the Born Alive Infants Protection Act; reinstating the ban on the use of United States foreign aid to promote abortion in other countries; refusing to fund the United Nations Population Fund; and nominating pro-life federal judges.
Kerry, on the other hand, it notes, voted against the partial-birth abortion ban six times; co-sponsored the proposed Freedom of Choice Act in an attempt to stop states from applying restrictions on abortion; opposed parental involvement in the abortion decisions of their own minor children; pledged to end the ban on the use of United States foreign aid to support abortion in other countries; and declared that he would only nominate abortion supporters to the United States Supreme Court so that women will continue to have a legal "right to choose" to abort their unborn babies.
Ms. Kralis acknowledged that a "proportionate reason" could apply to justify a vote for President Bush, that being that President Bush "would limit the harm" from abortion, but then inexplicably added that "[t]he good that Bush would do would far outweigh any evil that Kerry would do."In fact, President Bush will do much more good than harm, Kerry will do much more harm than good, and the good that President Bush will do will far outweigh any GOOD that Kerry would do.
As for any who thinks Kerry IS working to limit abortion, the information listed on Kerry Wrong for Catholics.com is simply overwhelming.
A casual reader of Ms. Kralis' article might erroneously conclude that the difference between President Bush and Senator Kerry on abortion is less than enormous, that President Bush flip-flops on abortion (instead of consistently favoring exceptions for rape and incest and refusing to use a litmus test in making judicial appointments), and that Senator Kerry IS trying to "limit the harm" from abortion, albeit not as much as President.Each of those conclusions would be wrong.
On March 12, 2004, Kerry for President issued a press release complaining that "[a]t a UNESCAP meeting in Bangkok, Thailand in 2002, the U.S. delegation fought to change language in a landmark international reproductive health care agreement and advanced a position that life begins at conception."
Catholic News Service now acknowledges that there is no issue on which the distinction between Bush and Kerry is clearer than abortion.
It credits President Bush with signing the partial-birth abortion ban and defending it in court; signing the Born Alive Infants Protection Act; reinstating the ban on the use of United States foreign aid to promote abortion in other countries; refusing to fund the United Nations Population Fund; and nominating pro-life federal judges.
Kerry, on the other hand, it notes, voted against the partial-birth abortion ban six times; co-sponsored the proposed Freedom of Choice Act in an attempt to stop states from applying restrictions on abortion; opposed parental involvement in the abortion decisions of their own minor children; pledged to end the ban on the use of United States foreign aid to support abortion in other countries; and declared that he would only nominate abortion supporters to the United States Supreme Court so that women will continue to have a legal "right to choose" to abort their unborn babies.
Ms. Kralis acknowledged that a "proportionate reason" could apply to justify a vote for President Bush, that being that President Bush "would limit the harm" from abortion, but then inexplicably added that "[t]he good that Bush would do would far outweigh any evil that Kerry would do."In fact, President Bush will do much more good than harm, Kerry will do much more harm than good, and the good that President Bush will do will far outweigh any GOOD that Kerry would do.
As for any who thinks Kerry IS working to limit abortion, the information listed on Kerry Wrong for Catholics.com is simply overwhelming.
posted by David at 6:44 PM
Track with co.mments
Rate this post:
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home