When people ask me why I am voting for Barack Obama in this election, I say, “Because I am a Christian and I vote my values.” I am pro-life, and when you line the two candidates up side by side, there’s an overwhelmingly clear choice. Which
candidate supports the life that is wriggling all over our public school’s playgrounds? Which candidate supports the lives of those who cannot afford health care, or who might be denied health care because of pre-existing conditions? Which candidate supports the lives of those on death row, who may or may not be wrongly accused? Which candidate supports the lives of our future descendants by pro-actively encouraging green, sustainable energy sources? True, Mitt Romney calls himself pro-life, but only on one issue: abortion. Given that we cannot truly know when life begins but that it’s pretty obvious that life abounds in the above situations (playground, hospitals, prisons, and—oh, yeah, the planet) I’d say Obama is the real pro-life candidate.
9 comments:
Thank you so much for this. I basically said the same thing this morning to a Catholic whose church had handed him a pamphlet telling him how to vote. I believe in the sanctity of life and of fighting for those who have no voice, even if that means allowing a woman to make a choice not to bring a child into the world for whom she cannot care. Mr Romney and Mr. Ryan seem to subscribe to a love the fetus, disregard the child philosophy, which I cannot, as a Christian understand or support.
Yes, it is strange that they would fight so hard to preserve life in the womb but then do nothing for the child/teen/adult/mother/father/elder.Thanks, Emily, for your comment!
As always Nerissa, well stated! The fight to preserve an unborn fetus but not the starving children, elderly, those in need, is not pro-life...
Well stated Nerissa. The fight to preserve an unborn fetus but not care for those in need already here is not pro-life ... Pro life is more than what is in the womb
Nerissa, well stated. The fight to preserve an unborn fetus but not those already present is not pro-life. Pro-life is so much more than what is in the womb...
Well stated Nerissa. The fight to preserve an unborn fetus but not care for those in need already here is not pro-life ... Pro life is more than what is in the womb
Thank you for posting this. All life is sacred.
There are other life issues as well, such as health care, ceasing bombing others, taking care of returning veterans, taking care of the elderly and infirm, and so on.
I'm with you Nerrissa. “Life” has many meanings, unfortunately, that definition has been hijacked lately. Although our current President hasn't been perfect, he at least tries to do the right thing. I think increasing troops in Afghanistan was a big mistake, but he did follow through on pulling us out of Iraq, something I didn't think he would do. Why is it we can always find funding for the next big bomb, but we can't seem to fund schools?
I've been critical of the President for bowling over too quickly when confronted, especially early in his term. However, when Mitch McConnell said: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president,” I knew that the conservatives really didn't care about us, or life, or anything else. They only care about winning. Governing is way down the list.
I can just imagine what that other singer/songwriter, Woody Guthrie, would have to say about the current state of affairs.
Post a Comment