Hypothetical question regarding a candidate's stance on one of the five non-negotiables

  • Thread starter Thread starter wanner47
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

wanner47

Guest
Please give me your opinion on this hypothetical situation.

A candidate for an election to the Senate answered a questionnaire about his or her stance on various issues. On 4 of the 5 non-negotiables, his/her answer is in line with Catholic teaching. On the issue of embryonic stem-cell research, however, his/her answer is that although s/he has supported ESCR in the past, and s/he has not changed his/her position, s/he believes that current research utilizing adult stem-cells can and will render the debate over embryonic stem cell research unnecessary, and therefore moot.

Would it be moral to vote for this candidate?
 
Very simple. If there is no other candidate in the race who is 5 for 5 in his answers, yes. If there another candidate who is 5 for 5, no.
 
Similar to the race here in Michigan for Governor.

Who’s more pro-life, the major party candidate with ESCR feelings like above, or a third party candidate who opposes all abortion except in case of danger to life of mother?
 
tafan said:
Very simple. If there is no other candidate in the race who is 5 for 5 in his answers, yes. If there another candidate who is 5 for 5, no.
Click to expand...
In my hypothetical, there is only one other candidate who is 5 for 5, and s/he is a write-in candidate who is very unlikely to win. The candidate who is 4 for 5 is the incumbent. His/her opponent is pro-abortion.

Edit - both candidates mentioned above stated that they oppose abortion (with a life of the mother exemption). Both support the repeal of Roe v Wade. Apparently candidate A does not consider ESCR to be abortion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top