Monday, October 18, 2004

Hugh Hewitt's Symposium: Why Bush? Why Not Kerry?

Hugh Hewitt's blog posed a simple question: why vote for Bush, and why not vote for Kerry?

For the evangelical, the answer is easy and lies within the words of the candidates themselves:

From the second debate:

"SARAH DEGENHART: Senator Kerry, suppose you are speaking with a voter who believed abortion is murder and the voter asked for reassurance that his or her tax dollars would not go to support abortion, what would you say to that person?

KERRY: I would say to that person exactly what I will say to you right now.

First of all, I cannot tell you how deeply I respect the belief about life and when it begins. I‘m a Catholic, raised a Catholic. I was an altar boy. Religion has been a huge part of my life. It helped lead me through a war, leads me today.

But I can‘t take what is an article of faith for me and legislate it for someone who doesn‘t share that article of faith..."

The decision to vote against Kerry is not just an "abortion" issue, but his response clearly demonstrates he has no core values (as if he hasn't already provided us with many other examples). How can one separate his faith in God, his belief in Christ--the one who declared that HE is the Truth? How can anybody seriously think Kerry depends on biblical instruction when he clearly finds truth in so many other places than Christ?

Compare Kerry's tortured answer to Bush's, from the third debate:

"I think it's important to promote a culture of life. I think a hospitable society is a society where every being counts and every person matters. I believe the ideal world is one in which every child is protected in law and welcomed to life. I understand there's great differences on this issue of abortion, but I believe reasonable people can come together and put good law in place that will help reduce the number of abortions. "

Kerry recently said he believes life begins at conception, but then will not vote against the brutal act of partial birth abortion. Even reasonable people should be able to agree on that! And most do. John Kerry has proven that he is NOT reasonable when it comes to abortion.

Regardless of who wins, the likely political reality is we are not going to see Roe v. Wade overturned unfortunately. But on one side we have a candidate who values a "culture of life" and on the other one who won't legislate his "article of faith."

If his article of faith is rooted in The Truth, but he won't leverage that Truth to guide his actions as president, where will he find his moral compass? Paris? Zogby?

Rather than being driven by the polls, Bush has taken politically unpopular positions because he feels they are right at his very core. He seeks guidance in prayer and receives strength and peace in the prayers of others. Given the choice, I'll take Bush's source of truth and guidance over Kerry's any day.


3 Comments:

At 12:27 PM, Blogger Brad said...

Kerry's response indicates he truly is clueless. He claims that he cannot impose an article of his personal faith on those who do not share his conviction. The implication he is clearly trying to leave with the listener is that he believes life begins at conception and abortion is an abhorrent practice which causes him much conflict due to his strict adherence to Catholic doctrine. (Why else bring up the fact that he is Catholic?) However, he claims, his liberal ideology and magnanimous tolerance is so strong that he cannot bring himself to legislate those views. It is a shame that his tolerance cannot be extended to include his "brethren" with whom he shares the Eucharist and the conviction that life begins at conception. Because, it is also abundantly clear from his answer that he has no such qualms about imposing the views of abortion seekers on all of us, whether or not we oppose the practice. By claiming a fundamental Constitutional right to abort, Kerry makes it ideologically impossible to oppose the use of federal funds to pay for the practice, thereby, betraying his "brethren" and forcing us to foot the bill. Why this hypocrisy is not pointed out more often is a mystery, because it is fudamental to Kerry's character. How many times in one life can one man betray those with whom he claims a kinship and continue to get away with it?

 
At 12:27 PM, Blogger Brad said...

Kerry's response indicates he truly is clueless. He claims that he cannot impose an article of his personal faith on those who do not share his conviction. The implication he is clearly trying to leave with the listener is that he believes life begins at conception and abortion is an abhorrent practice which causes him much conflict due to his strict adherence to Catholic doctrine. (Why else bring up the fact that he is Catholic?) However, he claims, his liberal ideology and magnanimous tolerance is so strong that he cannot bring himself to legislate those views. It is a shame that his tolerance cannot be extended to include his "brethren" with whom he shares the Eucharist and the conviction that life begins at conception. Because, it is also abundantly clear from his answer that he has no such qualms about imposing the views of abortion seekers on all of us, whether or not we oppose the practice. By claiming a fundamental Constitutional right to abort, Kerry makes it ideologically impossible to oppose the use of federal funds to pay for the practice, thereby, betraying his "brethren" and forcing us to foot the bill. Why this hypocrisy is not pointed out more often is a mystery, because it is fudamental to Kerry's character. How many times in one life can one man betray those with whom he claims a kinship and continue to get away with it?

 
At 7:30 AM, Blogger Reaganesque said...

Hey! Great site. I found it on Hugh Hewitt's blog. I have one on here, myself, so I hope you come on by and take a look. Well then... ta ta :)

 

Post a Comment

<< Home