The reason why I am a one-issue voter
There is no shortage of issues to command the voters’ attention in the November elections: fighting Islamic terrorism, trade, revitalizing an anemic economy, immigration, foreign and national security policy – to mention only a few.
All of them are very important to me, but one subject has always been paramount: the right to life of the unborn. Candidates can be right on all the other issues, but if they support abortion they don’t get my vote.
To me, the reason is clear-cut: To take the life of a developing child in the name of women’s rights is a profoundly immoral act. Since 1973, more than 58 million abortions have been performed in the United States, a figure approximating the population of Italy.
The Holocaust is recognized as a dreadful episode in human history, but the American version has gone on much longer, with a toll nearly ten times higher than the Nazi extermination of the Jews. Some people would make a distinction here, with unborn lives somehow counting for less. But both were human.
That Planned Parenthood, the nation’s leading abortionist, recently was caught on camera discussing the sale of body parts from aborted babies only compounds the evil.
As far as I am concerned, the choice in November is clear. Despite his questionable background in this area, Donald Trump now professes strong pro-life convictions, which I choose to believe, and could be counted on to appoint federal judges and nominate Supreme Court justices of like stripe.
Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, is the poster girl for abortion – which would be paid for with tax money if she has her way. Her judicial appointments would be the polar opposite of Trump’s. In Hillaryspeak, “women’s health” is code for preserving abortion rights, and she has called the election “a referendum on abortion,” so important is it to her. With her as its candidate, it’s no accident that the Democratic Party’s platform contains 19 references to protecting abortion.
Although a pro-life majority has emerged in America, I realize that many people will disagree with what I have written. In a way, I can identify with them, for in the early days of the push for abortion rights I was open to the idea. But I remember when that changed. I was reading a newspaper column in which the writer simply described what happened to an unborn baby in an abortion, with no religious arguments whatsoever. When I put that paper down, I was pro-life.
Some people may support abortion because they had abortions themselves, or helped procure one for a friend or relative. My late wife Cynthia, who practiced clinical social work in Sedalia, thought that was a significant factor in some people’s support for abortion.
For those in such situations – and the mental and emotional burden can be heavy, not to mention the wound to conscience – help is available. Project Rachel, a free abortion healing ministry of the Catholic Church, helps women of every background with specially trained clergy, spiritual directors and therapists. Complete information is available on the internet.
I had originally written another column for this space, but decided at the last minute to substitute this one. It’s not nearly as light a read as the first version would have been, but I made the switch because the subject is vastly more important. May it be food for thought as the election draws near.
Doug Kneibert is a former editor of the Sedalia Democrat. The viwes reflected in this column are those of the columnist and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Sedalia Democrat or Civitas Media LLC.