He was also pro-abortion, there is no getting around that. Which means that he was not the only real choice. All we can say is that he supported murder less than Obama.
This has nothing to do with the fact that Romney was fine with murder.
It has nothing to do with hating republicans, it has to do with life issues. One should always support pro-life politicians.
The list was created because we hear the same excuses all the time from Catholic voters trying to justify voting for pro-abortion Democrats. It saves time to just make a list of excuses and identify which one they’re using. And they use the same excuses all the time, with slight variations.
Lies.
Romney was pro-abortion. There was no disputing that. I will retract that if you can answer yes to the following question:Nailed it, zz912.
Yes, and it is precisely that kind of mentality which allows the slaughter of the unborn to continue - the idea that unless you’re perfect, I will not vote for you, and in so doing, will allow the guy who is for infanticide to win.
Exactly.
Are you calling me a liar? If so, then answer this question:
Same excuses and the children continue to die. We could end abortion in this country in 3 election cycles if Catholics would refuse to vote for anyone who supports unrestricted abortion on demand,. But it wont happen because Democrat Catholics will continue to demonize the GOP to such an extent killing 1.2 million children a year is almost a blessing to keep them from having to live in a world populated by evil republicans
Except, I wasn’t justifying voting for Obama. I did not vote for Obama. Your list is irrelevant to me since I have not voted for a democrat since the 1980s and that was in a primary.
I refused to vote for someone who allowed unrestricted abortion on demand, I also did not vote for Romney. So the question is, how did I violate Church teaching?
Last time I voted for A democrat for President was for Jimmy Cater in 1976. I campaigned for McGovern. As the saying goes "those who are not liberal when they are young have no heart, those who remain liberal as they mature have no mind.
If Romney is as you say pro-abortion and therefore an unacceptable candidate from a moral point of view, shouldn’t we expect Planned Parenthood for example to have endorsed him or at least acknowledged that Romney was on “their” side of the issue?
No, I never said anything like that. But, facts are fact, Romney supported murder, just less murder than Obama. Therefore, the only reason one could vote for him is because Obama was worse, not because there is a positive aspect to his position.
He is, nobody has disputed that. I gave a simple question, that if you can answer yes to, then he would be pro-life, but if you answer no, he is pro-abortion. Nobody has answered yes.
Obama supported more murder than Romney, but they both supported murder. You would expect hitmen to support more murder just as you would expect accountants to support more complicated tax systems.
I’d say that while Romney’s position may have been flawed and imperfect it was far preferable than Obama’s if Ishii’s enumeration of the substantive policy differences is accurate (and I suspect it is).
I never said that one could not vote for Romney, but it was because Obama’s position was so bad, not because Romney’s position was good.
Well I will agree with you insofar as I’ve never understood the logic behind the argument that one can be in favor of abortion in certain extreme circumstances but not in most cases. It’s either wrong or it’s not. However in the case of electing pro-life politicians to be such a stickler is ultimately self-defeating, because in many cases there won’t be any candidate who is absolutely pro-life.
We should however, cultivate candidates who are truly pro-life, in my opinion. But we are delving into the realm of prudential judgement.