Voting for the lesser of two evils


#1

In California District 52, we have to choose in the Nov election for either a Dem or a Rep, both pro-abortion, pro-homosexual “marriage”. Read this article cal-catholic.com/?p=14673. “In 2014, the Republicans, generally pro-life, are not likely to lose control of the U.S. House of Representatives. So a vote for a pro-abortion Democrat, is not likely to result in the death of more unborn babies. But a pro-abortion Republican like congressional candidate DeMaio has campaigned as a “new generation Republican” to lead the GOP away from the life and family issues.”… As for me, I may voting for the lesser of 2 evils- the Dem


#2

You can also choose not to vote at all–since you view your choice as a lesser of two evils. Also, whether we want to admit this, or not, every time we vote we are choosing a lesser of two evils because no politician is perfect.

With that said, and from my own pov, I will never vote for a Democrat simply because the Democratic Party has legal abortion as a central plank in their party platform–every vote for a Democrat advances that cause because every Democrat in office helps to make the DNC all the stronger, politically. It must be remebered that their is strength in numbers and the more Democrats there are in office, the stronger their party is at pushing their political agendas. You will never see a perfect candidate, and sometimes we have to think about the big picture.

IMO, all prolife people should be determined to never vote for the one party that makes killing the unborn a central (they are proud of it) plank in their platform. When we vote, like it or not, we are voting for a person, and most of the time we are also voting/supporting a politcal party (even if we did not intend to). And, when we vote for Democrats, we are saying we are okay with their party platform and agenda.

Here is the truth: if Democrats stopped getting elected because of the life issue, they would be forced to change their party platform if they want to hold political office. The citizens of this country have the power in them to effect real change–they just have to decide to do it. :slight_smile:

In your case, as I said above, I’d either vote for the Republican (since that helps strengthen the GOP ranks, which are mainly prolife), or I would not vote at all.


#3

Are they really the only 2 candidates? I disagree with voting for the lesser of 2 evils unless there is truly no other option. If there is any other candidate, perhaps an independent running, vote for them. We need to get rid of the 2 party system anyways.


#4

Unfortunately we have had to vote for the lesser of two evils in this country for a long time. If we only have two people to select from then there is little else you can do but decide between them. I have done this many times. I have also refused to vote at all because the candidates in question were so bad, or I have voted a third party when the option was there, for the same reasons.

Do the best you can.


#5

You can also choose not to vote at all–since you view your choice as a lesser of two evils. Also, whether we want to admit this, or not, every time we vote we are choosing a lesser of two evils because no politician is perfect.

With that said, and from my own pov, I will never vote for a Democrat simply because the Democratic Party has legal abortion as a central plank in their party platform–every vote for a Democrat advances that cause because every Democrat in office helps to make the DNC all the stronger, politically. It must be remebered that their is strength in numbers and the more Democrats there are in office, the stronger their party is at pushing their political agendas. You will never see a perfect candidate, and sometimes we have to think about the big picture.

IMO, all prolife people should be determined to never vote for the one party that makes killing the unborn a central (they are proud of it) plank in their platform. When we vote, like it or not, we are voting for a person, and most of the time we are also voting/supporting a politcal party (even if we do not intend to). And, when we vote for Democrats, we are saying we are okay with their party platform and agenda. I have no idea how we can ever hope to make abortion illegal if we keep voting for the one party that works non-stop to keep it legal. If we do not make a statement with our vote, for all offices, than how can anything ever change?

Here is the truth: if Democrats stopped getting elected because of the life issue, they would be forced to change their party platform if they want to hold political office. The citizens of this country have the power in them to effect real change–they just have to decide to do it. Sadly, many other issues are more important to people, and abortion (the slaughter of our unborn) has dropped quite low on conservative’s list of priorities–yet conservatives tend not to realize that the left continues to drive forward (in near rabid fashion) to keep the killing of our unborn legal–the left never sleeps on the issue of so-called choice, while the right falls asleep routinely while the babies continue to die.

In your case, as I said above, I’d either vote for the Republican (since that helps strengthen the GOP ranks, which are mainly prolife), or I would not vote at all. Voting for the Democrat only makes the Democratic Party stronger…it serves no othe purpose, imo.


#6

If both candidates support intrinsic evils such as abortion, we should vote for the one that will do the least harm. Is the Dem really the lesser of 2 evils? Or is the Rep. likely to side with his/her party on critical life votes?


#7

You could always write in your name as opposed to voting for the lesser of two evils. Why vote for anyone who is evil in the first place. I cannot begin to tell you how many times I’ve written my name in for public office because I was so dissatisfied with the list of candidates. Of course I’ve never won, but it’s the principal that’s important to me.


#8

There have been times when I have refused to vote for either candidate. In PA, where I live, I rejected Arlen Specter, Tom Ridge and Barbara Hafer. I wrote in other candidates. If this was prohibited, as in other states, I’d leave it blank. One time it was tough to do, but I did. Lynn Yeakel made Specter look like a choir boy, and Specter narrowly won. But, of course, Hafer and, before his death. ol’ Arlen vindicated my rejection of them by officially joining the Democrat Party. :o


#9

Good point. Even if the Republican candidate isn’t Pro-Life there’s a possibility he might give in to pressure to conform to the Republican party which as a whole is Pro-Life. But the Democrat candidate is Pro-Abortion and has pressure from his party to continue that way. And as for the question of can a Catholic vote for the lesser of two evils, Pope Saint John Paul II said the following:
“A particular problem of conscience can arise in cases where a legislative vote would be decisive for the passage of a more restrictive law, aimed at limiting the number of authorized abortions, in place of a more permissive law already passed or ready to be voted on. Such cases are not infrequent. It is a fact that while in some parts of the world there continue to be campaigns to introduce laws favouring abortion, often supported by powerful international organizations, in other nations-particularly those which have already experienced the bitter fruits of such permissive legislation-there are growing signs of a rethinking in this matter. In a case like the one just mentioned, when it is not possible to overturn or completely abrogate a pro-abortion law, an elected official, whose absolute personal opposition to procured abortion was well known, could licitly support proposals aimed at limiting the harm done by such a law and at lessening its negative consequences at the level of general opinion and public morality. This does not in fact represent an illicit cooperation with an unjust law, but rather a legitimate and proper attempt to limit its evil aspects.” - Evangelium Vitae


#10

I agree. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.

Peace

Tim


#11

But, is there ever a candidate or political party that is without sin? Its easier for the greater of the two evils to win if fewer people actively oppose it. I see it as voting against the greater of the two evils.


#12

That isn’t the criteria I use. Unless Jesus or Mary runs for office, the candidate will be a sinner.

If the choice is between two candidates who support an evil like abortion, there is no choice to me.

Peace

Tim


#13

I agree with you if each candidate is Pro-Abortion to the same degree. If that’s the case then neither would be the lesser of two evils. But if the only choice I see is between a candidate that is 2% Pro-Abortion and one that is 100% Pro-Abortion I would vote for the 98% Pro-Life of one candidate and against the 100% Pro-Abortion of the other. A good way to know which candidate is more or less Pro-Abortion is by which candidate Planned Parenthood is for and which one they are against.


#14

Unless PP automatically takes away points simply because one candidate is a republican. Besides, I personally don’t look to *PP *for any guidance.

If a candidate declares that he or she is for abortion, that is all I need to know. In the case that the OP asked about, that seems to be the case.

From the article in the OP:

The no-show was Republican Carl DeMaio, who had run TV ads with his homosexual partner and was openly pro-abortion.

A vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.

Peace

Tim


#15

Demaio is not just a homosexual pro-abortion and against Marriage, he is an activist claiming to change the Republican party “The new generation” he says- and the “elite” republicans are backing him up. You are forgetting this time there is no danger of the Dems getting the House of Representatives, so even if the Dem votes against life or Marriage his vote does not count (overwhelmed by the Republican votes- who will be the majority per redistricting. There is a fight for the heart & soul of the republican party - so far - the party still holding our moral values most distinguishable: Life, Marriage & Religious Liberty. If the Rep Demaio wins, he will actively work to transform the Rep party from the inside and we all be left with not a choice to vote for- like has happened in Canada, England. Let’s try to avoid that, in this case by voting for the Dem Peters, the lesser of 2 evils.


#16

In another occasion I would have agreed with you. But in this case we need to prevent one winning - Rep Demaio and the best way o do it is by voting for his opponent, the Dem Peters.


#17

As Archbishop Chaput explained we are NOT voting for the lesser of two evils-we are voting to lessen evil


#18

Thank you, that is a wise quote, from a wise man.


#19

I’d go with that. I don’t know where the lesser of two evils argument comes from because Cicero stated “Primum, minima de malis.” (Of evils choose the least.)


#20

Translation: Vote Republican.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.