Friday, November 16, 2007

Bishops getting more specific on voting guidelines

Chicago Tribune article quotes Fr Thomas Reese of the Woodstock Theological Center of Georgetown University (never trust an institute called "Woodstock" with theology!)
" previous statements in his memory have not spelled out such specific consequences. The statement reflects the bishops' frustations with pro-choice Democratic politicians and Republican leaders who focus solely on ending abortion," he . So, according to Fr. Reese, they weren't decisive at all.
If you can't vote for pro-death liberals, and you shouldn't be a single issue voter about life issues, and you have to consider the plethora of other social issues, who is left to vote for? I felt that Sam Brownback was purely pro-life and compassionate on social issues like immigration, but many conservatives rejected him on that basis. Few Senators have done for human rights, both for the unborn and the born what Sam Brownback has done, and you see where that got him.
I am very frustrated with this upcoming election. That does not mean I'm giving up, I am keeping a low profile here, supporting Mike Huckabee, and watching with interest the goings on. Which way my state will go this election is a foregone conclusion, New York is as blue a state as they come.
I know two things for sure: I will NOT cede this election to Hillary. And I will pray. A LOT.

1 comment:

Lynne said...

Fred Thompson was endorsed by NRTL and he helped Judge Roberts navigate the nomination process past Congress. While he was in the Senate he had a 100% pro-life voting record.