About 15 years ago, I was fortunate enough to read a speech by then Archbishop O’Mahoney of California entitled "The Seamless Garment of Life." That speech changed my thinking, especially in regards to capital punishment. (I formerly was in favor). It made me clearly understand the "pro-life" philosophy. The theory holds that man may tamper with taxes, red light, green light, etc., but that God’s perfect creation humankind cannot be tampered with this one area. Human life, in all its forms—sex, color, ethnicity, creed, and sexual orientation—are simply our artificial ways of categorizing or describing God’s perfect creation, human life.
Like individuals, the government also cannot tamper with human life. Now, in our society there are many forms of attack on human life; amongst them capital punishment, abortion, partial birth abortion, Euthanasia, etc. Now, because a person is a criminal and an utterly despicable human being, does not change the equation. Emotionally we may feel that they should be hung off the nearest LIPA pole but even this creature is part of God’s perfect creation and cannot be executed.
Now our two presidential candidates both are for capital punishment, so let’s discuss their differences on other human life issues.
I preface my remarks by adding, obviously we have a lot of educational work to do when both our presidential candidates are for capital punishment but a journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step.
But we all must recognize that the Clinton-Gore administration has brought us to new lows by their support of partial birth abortion. Democratic United States Senator Daniel P. Moynihan has said, "Partial birth abortion is infanticide." This from a liberal pro-abortion politician. So, obviously with partial birth abortion we’ve broken some new leg or undelivered (inside the mother) and then to suck out the baby’s brain while alive on the operating table is partial birth abortion. A heinous act it is, as it seems barbaric. To semi-deliver a live child (or liberals-fetus, if you prefer) and to leave an arm and leg inside the mother so the baby is partially delivered is reprehensible.
Now for a moment let’s forget the economy, schools, taxes, etc. After all, what is more important than human life?
To be pro abortion or capital punishment and argue—yeah, but it costs X amount of dollars to incarcerate a prisoner annually, or the inconvenience and cost of raising a child is to equate human life with money and finances—a la Hitler. Human life cannot be equated with dollars.
Remember the next step in this (it’s done before) "brave new world"—creating a perfect race, no infirmities, errors allowed—a la Third Reich. Ill, mentally challenged, homosexuals, anyone they found "imperfect" was eliminated. It took time but ultimately it happened, it was done.
So to protect all human life, God’s perfect creatures, we must put up roadblocks in the path of these well-meaning liberals. Is this not the end, but in history this is where it has ended before.
Partial birth abortion must be stopped. Congress passed a bill outlawing it but that was vetoed by our President.
So all we need is a similar Congress and an anti-partial birth President. Now the only candidate, clearly and consistently against this procedure (or murder) is George W. Bush.
Now we may not fix all the schools, or solve pollution concerns, but if there’s one thing we can do America, it’s this. We can honor God and the pro-life agenda to protect us all.
Please vote this Tuesday—I’m voting Bush, Lazio, and Stasi for the reason cited, one consistent line for consistent thought and policy on this.
And every major religion worldwide has some adherents or groups that say the same thing, not just Catholics. We shall win this one. It’s simply up to you.