Still More on Politics - Ugh
I can only decide, from the choices I have, which person will make the decision closest to that which God would make, that I would make.
I don't get it.
People don't think this way when it comes to smaller issues, so why does this change when it's bigger issues we're talking about?
Here, Mr. Michael, you can buy this rusty car, or this really rusty car.
Mr. Michael, we'd like to offer you a cold plate of liver, or this plate of poison.
Please choose between reading this Playboy magazine or this Victoria's Secret catalog.
I have yet to find someone who can make a convincing case for why these are my only two choices. In every instance above, the answer is an unhesitating, "Neither, thank you, I'll wait until you present me with better options."
But when it comes to who is going to run the entire country for the next four years, somehow I have to choose the "lesser of two evils?"
WHY?
Because not voting steals a vote from Bush? How is that - can you explain to me - if I wasn't going to vote for Bush in the first place? Ok, you've got me, I stole a vote from Bush - and I also stole one from Kerry, so it pretty much evens out in the end.
I'm holding out, folks. I'm waiting until a Catholic man steps up and says:
a) that abortion is a damnable evil, is an offense against Almighty God, and must be ceased immediately
b) that Sodomy is a sin that cries to heaven for vengeance and will not be tolerated in this country
c) that divorce is an offense against God and the Holy Church, and will not be legalized by the state
d) that contraception is evil, and this country will not much such things available to the public
e) that Jesus Christ is king of nations, and of America in particular, and that we are from henceforth going to be behaving as such
A tall order? You bet. But I'm not about to lower my expectations in the meanwhile and settle for less because the Two Major Parties told me I had to.
And you know what? If every Catholic would do this very same thing, that misty ideal might just become a reality this year.
I don't get it.
People don't think this way when it comes to smaller issues, so why does this change when it's bigger issues we're talking about?
Here, Mr. Michael, you can buy this rusty car, or this really rusty car.
Mr. Michael, we'd like to offer you a cold plate of liver, or this plate of poison.
Please choose between reading this Playboy magazine or this Victoria's Secret catalog.
I have yet to find someone who can make a convincing case for why these are my only two choices. In every instance above, the answer is an unhesitating, "Neither, thank you, I'll wait until you present me with better options."
But when it comes to who is going to run the entire country for the next four years, somehow I have to choose the "lesser of two evils?"
WHY?
Because not voting steals a vote from Bush? How is that - can you explain to me - if I wasn't going to vote for Bush in the first place? Ok, you've got me, I stole a vote from Bush - and I also stole one from Kerry, so it pretty much evens out in the end.
I'm holding out, folks. I'm waiting until a Catholic man steps up and says:
a) that abortion is a damnable evil, is an offense against Almighty God, and must be ceased immediately
b) that Sodomy is a sin that cries to heaven for vengeance and will not be tolerated in this country
c) that divorce is an offense against God and the Holy Church, and will not be legalized by the state
d) that contraception is evil, and this country will not much such things available to the public
e) that Jesus Christ is king of nations, and of America in particular, and that we are from henceforth going to be behaving as such
A tall order? You bet. But I'm not about to lower my expectations in the meanwhile and settle for less because the Two Major Parties told me I had to.
And you know what? If every Catholic would do this very same thing, that misty ideal might just become a reality this year.
<< Home