Monday, March 10, 2008

Choosing Life - Choosing McCain

With the Republican nominee for president settled at this point in the primary season and either Democratic nominee being totally anti-life and pro-abortion to a degree not even seen in the 1992 election, pro-life advocates and people of common sense need to seriously consider the stakes of the 2008 Presidential Race as it applies to the unborn, the elderly, and the medically dependent and disabled.

Granted there are those who consider Senator John McCain's recent votes on the funding of embryonic stem cell research to be a serious problem and will demand that he reverse himself before they agree to support him for president. This issue has been a concern and I have discussed the subject personally with the Senator on more than one occasion. I have asked him to realize that these are unborn human beings, to examine the recent breakthroughs in the field and to understand the scientific and moral significance of these latest trends. While he has not come completely around, it is my hope that his staff has and will continue to provide him with the latest information so that he can fully appreciate our position. I suspect that as he and his team study the issue they will realize that the pro-life position is correct and will embrace that position fully. There has been some progress as seen in his statement on the campaign website. It recognizes the serious moral questions involved and the need to respect human life. The important news is that leaders in the pro-life community have an open door to discuss the subject and that the Senator knows we are about what is in the best interests of the nation and the nation's children.

We all know the Senator's pro-life voting record. Here are some highlights.
  1. He supports reversal of Roe v. Wade.
  2. He opposes funding for pro-abortion groups such as Planned Parenthood.
  3. He has supported the Hyde Amendment to prevent taxpayers' funds from being used to pay for abortions.
  4. He has supported the Mexico City Policy as applied to preventing pro-abortion groups from using federal funds overseas to promote abortion.
  5. He supported and recently co-sponsored an amendment to a Senate health bill to permanently prevent federal funds from being used to perform abortions in Indian hospitals. This amendment recently passed the Senate 52-42.
  6. He supported the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.
  7. He voted for and co-sponsored the Federal Abortion Ban.
  8. He voted in support of parental consent and notification laws.
  9. He voted in favor of Supreme Court and appellate court judges who would view the Constitution as respecting the right to life.
  10. He has repeatedly voted to prohibit the District of Columbia from using federal funds or any taxpayer funds to provide abortion services.
These are just some of the major points in his 24 year record. McCain is also on record as voting to save the life of Terri Schiavo, a vote Barack Obama has publicly regretted. I will speak to that comment on another message.

The National Abortion Rights League has given McCain a 0% rating. They refer to his voting record as "solidly anti-choice." In fact when you read what NARAL has to say, you ask why is there any controversy on the pro-life side. Would that the rest of the Senate would vote this way on pro-life issues.

Now one must also acknowledge that as pro-lifers we have disagreed with him on such issues as campaign finance reform, especially as applied to grass roots organizations. Still, even in disagreement, our conversations ( by this I mean Arizona pro-life leaders and McCain) have been frank and respectful. We have stated our concerns and our areas of disapproval. I would expect that relationship to continue.

In today's news the McCain Campaign announced a list of Catholics who make up the Catholics for McCain National Steering Committee. Senator Sam Brownback, Governor Frank Keating, Deal Hudson, Austin Ruse, Tom Monaghan, and many other very well known Catholics are a part of this national steering committee. You will even find a lawyer from Arizona who has agreed to serve in that capacity. It is now time for all of us who are serious about protecting the small gains that we have made to make sure that the abortion industry does not take over the White House.

When Bill Clinton ran for president in 1992, he told the American people that he thought abortion should be "{safe, legal and rare." Just check out Jill Stanek's recent column on what that really meant.You will reminded of the terrible acts that Clinton committed against the unborn.

The bottom line is that a democrat in the White House, whether it is Obama or Hillary would be a disaster to the unborn children, to the medically dependent and disabled and to those who are vulnerable, whether they are the elderly or the infirm or the next Terri Schiavo. IF WE CARE about those potential situations, we must insure the election of John McCain.

The U.S. Supreme Court will have at least one and probably three vacancies during the next president's term of office. IF WE CARE about who will sit on the Supreme Court AND the courts of appeals throughout the country, we must work for the election of John McCain.

The pressure by the left to have a universal health care funded by the taxpayer will not let up. Hillary tried it in 1993. In her 1993 plan was an abortion mandate to have taxpayer funded abortions. It would also mean managed care and that could mean passive or even active euthanasia.A Clinton or Obama presidency would see the end of the Hyde Amendment to the annual appropriations bill. The passage of the Hyde Amendment has been responsible for saving the lives of over a million unborn children. IF YOU CARE about protecting these millions of unborn children, as well as your right to private health care, your right to select your own doctors and insurance plans, and your right not to have your tax dollars paying for a million abortions, then we must work for the election of John McCain.

In the end, we have two choices. One of them may not result in everything we want in a president (although he may surprise you), the other will insure the death of children and the end of much of what we have accomplished over these last 35 years. For unlike our efforts which are about restoring protection for all innocent human life, the pro-abortion industry is not content with just keeping abortion legal. The abortion industry wants to force government and therefore the taxpayer to pay for abortions. The abortion industry wants Catholic hospitals to provide abortions. And the abortion industry wants to punish all those who will not be silent about this holocaust. Remember how the abortion industry relentlessly for 20 years went after our friend Joe Scheidler. do you seriously think if they get into power, they will not use the power of government to destroy the pro-life pregnancy centers and the network of pro-life medical clinics throughout the country. does anyone remember the now New York governor and former attorney general Elliot Spitzer and how he tried to shut down the pregnancy centers in New York? Pro-lifers successfully fought that government attack. Interesting that the attacks came right after the election of Bill Clinton to the White House. Years later when there were women injured by the abortion industry, Spizter was nowhere it be found.

Right now Elliot Spitzer has some of his own problems.

So my friends and fellow pro-life activists, the choice is clear.

Choose life. Choose John McCain.

3 Comments:

At 10:08 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This endorsement is premature. McCain's vote to fund embryonic stem cell research is reprehensible and he needs to reverse his position and commit to a ban if he wants to secure my vote (and campaign contribution). I don't care what NARAL says. Abortion advocates always frame their arguments in terms of the supposed "woman's right to choose" -- there is no such choice with repect to embryonic stem cell research, and despite whatever benefits it may have that adult stem cell research may not (and there is no proof of such advantages), it does not justify the destruction of innocent human life.

 
At 3:43 PM, Blogger John J. Jakubczyk said...

I agree that Senator McCain's vote re ESCR was wrong. He knows that I think it is wrong. I expect that he knows that I will not stop reminding him of his need to review, reassess and revise his position on this subject. That is an ongoing process. But my reason for writing the piece is to state clearly the options and consequences of those options. Everyone has to make their own decision in light of their conscience. My role is to examine the field before us and analyze how we prevail.

 
At 3:35 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Although, to say the least, I don't happen to be a McCain partisan either (I first supported Brownback, then Huckabee ), Mr. Jakubczyk's position in endorsing our Arizona for President at this point can not be seruously disputed. Certainly, McCain's support of ESCR definitively proves that he soes not even understand the simple scientific essence of the pro-life argument, that human personhood begins at conception, and his rhetorical record is shoddy, as is his support of pro-abortion Republicans over pro-life ones. But the fact is that he has secured the GOP nomimation, and he did at least send a reprsentative to last year's AZRTL Conference and has actively sought pro-life support for his campaign. If Hillary or Obama is elected the national political pro-life really will be destroyed, despite the improving demographic trends (which the national
political "leadership" has not been able to exploit in the least).

One other point concerning the reprehensible actions mentioned of Elliot Spitzer, and similar ones by "Republican" NYC Mayors Giuliani and Blomberg (the latter of whom has required elective abortion training for interns in city hospitals) and many other sick social engineers masquerading as public servants: Lincoln's famous remark that a house divided against itself (in that case over slavery, of course) can not stand applies equally to legal abortion. The Greatest American was right that "it will all become one thing," in that either slavery would have been reimposed on the union states, or the confederacy would have to have been allowed to secede. With Roe/Doe, Blackmun and Co. actually superceded even what Dred Scott did prior to the Civil War.

It is perfectly consistent of these abortion advocates to never be satisfied with the oxymoronic "pro-choice" label and policy, since this position can not assuage their consciences. For this emotional need, they must always advance aborting babies, not just allowing women the "right to choose," as a positive "good," lest they be forced to face the truth of the consequences of their lies and acts.

John K. Walker
Phoenix, AZ

 

Post a Comment

<< Home