I was preparing my column for the parish bulletin yesterday, and was writing about our miserable choices in the presidential election. Like many people, I find the two party candidates morally unacceptable, and I have decided I will not vote for either. But what are the alternatives?
My original plan was to write a summary of each candidate; then I remembered the Archbishop really doesn't like any sort of "voter guides" provided in our parishes, and whatever my intention, it might have seemed to be that. So, I cut all that out, and pasted it here. This is my personal blog. So here is the information I gathered:
Former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton is aggressively pro-abortion, even favoring tax funding for abortion. She has made clear she will appoint justices to the U.S. Supreme Court that will sustain abortion on demand, as well as maintain the Obergefell decision that redefined marriage. She has voiced support for policies and decisions under President Obama that are harmful to religious freedom. I found conflicting responses on torture. Her website doesn’t address euthanasia, but I found a comment online endorsing it. She endorses limiting, but not ending, the death penalty.
Meanwhile, businessman Donald Trump has given much more positive answers on abortion – although he supports abortion in the case of rape and incest; he has said he will appoint judges that are pro-life and pro-traditional marriage. It should be mentioned that he is a recent convert to these positions. He has said conflicting things about religious freedom. Mr. Trump strongly supports the death penalty; he has called for increased use of torture, and endorsed targeting and killing non-combatant family members of terrorists.
Notably, his website doesn’t address any of these issues; these positions can be found elsewhere. Meanwhile, Mr. Trump has become known for a long string of outrageous and offensive statements, including about women, illegal immigrants, a Muslim family whose son died in the service of our country, a U.S. born judge of Mexican descent, and former POW and current Senator John McCain, just to cite a few examples.
Obviously there are many more issues of concern than what I’ve highlighted, but not all issues are of equal gravity, and I’ve tried to call attention to those that matter most. Some people have decided they will support one of these candidates as the “lesser of two evils.” That is a morally acceptable approach, but I think we need to be clear-eyed about the reality of the candidate we end up voting for.
But what about an alternative? No one is obligated to vote for either the Democrat or Republican, especially if you have serious reservations, as many have. I took some time this week looking up the five most prominent “third party” candidates; here’s my summary, with links to their websites so you can make your own judgments.
Darrell Castle, Constitution Party. He is 100% prolife and pro-traditional marriage. His party is against euthanasia, but supports the death penalty. He is strong on religious freedom. I could not find something explicit on torture. His party is fairly conservative, although it does oppose “interventionism” in foreign policy. Website here.
Gary Johnson, Libertarian Party. He describes himself as personally opposed to abortion but doesn’t support any change of laws to protect the unborn. He is in favor of so-called “same sex marriage” and is unclear on protecting religious freedom. He is against torture. I couldn’t find his position on euthanasia or the death penalty. The Libertarian Party tends to be very anti-government, often going so far as to advocate legalizing prostitution and drugs, and making drastic reductions in the powers and expenditures of the federal government. Website here.
Michael Maturen, American Solidarity Party. He is a Catholic, and his party is an attempt to develop a consistently Catholic approach on all federal issues. He is 100% prolife and pro-traditional marriage. He is against torture and the death penalty. In questions of economics and foreign policy, his approach includes ideas from both left and right.
Evan McMullin, Independent. His platform is much briefer than the others. His website gives a strong statement in defense of the sanctity of life and religious freedom, but isn’t as specific as many would like. He opposes tax funding for abortion and says he would appoint judges that would overturn Roe v. Wade (which imposed abortion-on-demand). He specifically distances himself from torture and targeting non-combatants in war. I couldn’t find his position on euthanasia or the death penalty. His website doesn’t address marriage, but elsewhere I found an interview in which he said he wouldn’t seek to overturn the Supreme Court’s Obergefell ruling imposing “same sex marriage” on all 50 states.
Jill Stein, Green Party. She is strongly pro-legal abortion and supports redefining marriage to include same sex “marriage.” Her party’s positions on these issues suggest she won’t be friendly to religious freedom concerns. She is against torture and the death penalty. I couldn’t find her position on euthanasia. Her platform overall is pretty left wing, favoring drastic reductions in defense spending, and significant increases in government spending and involvement in the economy.