If the were a US presidential election in which the two candidates were Martin Sheen and Rudy Giuliani and you were eligible to vote, who would you vote for
( Read more... )
I like Martin Sheen, but that would be a difficult choice. Maybe I would vote for him based on this:
Sheen: I cannot make a choice for a woman, particularly a black or brown or poor pregnant woman. I would not make a judgment in the case. As a father and a grandfather, I have had experience with children who don't always come when they are planned, and I have experienced the great joy of God's presence in my children, so I'm inclined to be against abortion of any life. But I am equally against the death penalty or war-- anywhere people are sacrificed for some end justifying a means. I don't think abortion is a good idea. I personally am opposed to abortion, but I will not judge anybody else's right in that regard because I am not a woman and I could never face the actual reality of it.
I don't think abortion is a good idea. I personally am opposed to abortion, but I will not judge anybody else's right in that regard because I am not a woman and I could never face the actual reality of it.
Amusing, because he's kind of passing judgment by saying, I personally am opposed to abortion, and, I don't think abortion is a good idea.
That's the thing I don't get. If you don't want to pass judgment, then don't.
I don't see anything wrong with that. I think we're all entitled to pass judgement for ourselves, and in fact we should. The problem for me is when others want to shove their values onto someone else, through legislating their behavior.
I see nothing hypocritical here either, unlike John Kerry, who claimed he wouldn't deprive others of their abortion rights even though he was personally opposed to it and a Catholic! To me, that is so hugely inconsistent that I could not trust him at all. Nobody has to be a Catholic. If you think abortion is okay for anybody, you don't be a Catholic. I know some people disagree, but that alone means to me that I could never consider Catholicism for myself.
Well, Martin Sheen has already served two terms, so he can't be elected again... Really though, I could never vote for a pro-life president, but I could also never vote for someone who was socially conservative/pro-war. I'd pick a third-party candidate.
In either case, to reiterate myself to the benefit of no one:
I don't make my presidential decision based on their abortion stance. I don't think any one common issue trumps others. If the question is something like, "Would you vote for Shitty President A who happens to agree with you on one thing, or Awesome President B who doesn't agree with you on that one thing," in almost all cases it's B.
If a president's sole platform crux is abortion, they're not doing their job right. I'm not saying it's not important. But LOTS of things are VERY important, like stable economy, general civil rights, and good foreign policy which all preclude having the time between scrounging for food and dodging bombs to ask ourselves abortion questions.
As far as the specifics, I'd probably never vote for either. Both of their policies are pretty damn repugnant, and in those cases I usually vote for the underdog party because I think competition improves both sides.
I don't make my decision based solely on their abortion stance, but in the case of a choice between the two I wouldn't vote for Awesome President B, who is pro-life. I could not bring myself to vote for someone who was against a woman's right to choose no matter how awesome he would be, because in my opinion he wouldn't be that awesome.
What you are saying, if you'll permit me to interpret and correct me if I'm wrong, is that no issue precludes an abortion discussion, no matter what. This, and this may be a matter of semantics, is a case where a sole issue trumps the others, and regardless of the fact that you do consider other issues, a yes or a no on this single issue can completely trump all others. That is what I call a sole-issue vote.
It would depend. If Martin Sheen ran on a platform of ABORTIONS WILL BE ILLEGAL ON MY 2ND DAY IN OFFICE, I'd be campaigning for Guiliani. If, as is usually the case with pro-life lefties, he was instead running a campaign focused on prevention, and had no plans to try to dismember abortion rights, I'd probably vote for Sheen.
Comments 44
Sheen: I cannot make a choice for a woman, particularly a black or brown or poor pregnant woman. I would not make a judgment in the case. As a father and a grandfather, I have had experience with children who don't always come when they are planned, and I have experienced the great joy of God's presence in my children, so I'm inclined to be against abortion of any life. But I am equally against the death penalty or war-- anywhere people are sacrificed for some end justifying a means. I don't think abortion is a good idea. I personally am opposed to abortion, but I will not judge anybody else's right in that regard because I am not a woman and I could never face the actual reality of it.
Reply
Amusing, because he's kind of passing judgment by saying, I personally am opposed to abortion, and, I don't think abortion is a good idea.
That's the thing I don't get. If you don't want to pass judgment, then don't.
Reply
I see nothing hypocritical here either, unlike John Kerry, who claimed he wouldn't deprive others of their abortion rights even though he was personally opposed to it and a Catholic! To me, that is so hugely inconsistent that I could not trust him at all. Nobody has to be a Catholic. If you think abortion is okay for anybody, you don't be a Catholic. I know some people disagree, but that alone means to me that I could never consider Catholicism for myself.
Reply
2. I don't think abortion is a good idea is a blanket judgment.
3. If your opinion includes the idea that judging is wrong, then you need say no more than that.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Really though, I could never vote for a pro-life president, but I could also never vote for someone who was socially conservative/pro-war. I'd pick a third-party candidate.
Reply
In either case, to reiterate myself to the benefit of no one:
I don't make my presidential decision based on their abortion stance. I don't think any one common issue trumps others. If the question is something like, "Would you vote for Shitty President A who happens to agree with you on one thing, or Awesome President B who doesn't agree with you on that one thing," in almost all cases it's B.
If a president's sole platform crux is abortion, they're not doing their job right. I'm not saying it's not important. But LOTS of things are VERY important, like stable economy, general civil rights, and good foreign policy which all preclude having the time between scrounging for food and dodging bombs to ask ourselves abortion questions.
As far as the specifics, I'd probably never vote for either. Both of their policies are pretty damn repugnant, and in those cases I usually vote for the underdog party because I think competition improves both sides.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
but the idea of voting for Martin Sheen for president is kind of off putting in a general sort of way.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment