Read the bill itself,HR 1094.

Paul talks about it on this video that I shot.

You will note that he never mentions the lawsuit thing, that’s just something that I have deduced. I see it as an inevitability.

It is clear to me that Paul only talks about his pro-life stance when asked, so as not to alienate the anti-war libs that are taking a second look at him. He can sort of sound like Giuliani by stating that states should decide how to deal with abortion. The difference of course, and what is left unnoticed, is that the states will be left to deal with abortion in light of legislation such as HR 1094 which, as President, he would work for and sign.

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 goes very well with the rule that we should not do evil so that good may come. Supporting a law that restricts abortion isn’t doing evil, it’s just does less good than we can.

So having stated all of that, it is my opinion (and I’m ready to have my ignoranced cured) that a Catholic can not hold his nose and vote for Giuliani, given that Giuliani will most assuredly increase evil in the form of funding to Planned Parenthood, and other government programs that involve population control. The lesser of two evils does not sound like Catholic doctrine, unlike do no evil so that good may come. The same holds true for a candidate that believes in and plans to execute pre-emptive wars. He could be the most pro-life guy but we can not do evil so good may come. But don’t just stay home. Go and write in yourself if you have to so that message is sent.

As for me, I am a Ron Paul supporter. I was on the Brownback bandwagon for a while, then Huckabee for a day but was never satisfied. I pretty much felt the same way as kalej. Ron Paul is not perfect, but he’s pretty close and his approach to the life issue is clever and under the radar of the pro-aborts. Ron Paul has introduced legislation that defines life at conception and bars the issue from being dealt with in the Federal courts. That means that with one stroke of a pen, Roe vs. Wade goes away. No more worrying about judges that may not decide correctly, and no more waiting for the day when enough states come together to put forth a solid constitutional amendment. Any state at that point could become a haven for its unborn citizens (South Carolina comes to mind). The other states will have to deal with their laws getting challenged. When a dad finds out that his child has been aborted you better believe that there will be a lawsuit. Remember…Congress will have already defined life as starting at conception.

It’s like this. If there are two trains, and both are headed toward the same cliff where the bridge is out, would you rather be on the one going 45 mph or 90 mph?

There are no saints. If you are looking for a saint, you will stay home every election.

If I walk into the booth and there are two candidates on the ballot, Giuliani and Clinton, I will vote for the least evil, who is in my opinion, Giuliani.

If there’s a third, less evil option, I will vote for them. This, in my opinion, is how all people of good conscience should use their vote. Don’t worry about who is “electable”. Worry about who is the person you support.

So if the Republican party nominates a pro-choice candidate, I will know then that I can no longer be a Republican. The only reason I’m not Democrat is their stands on life and family issues.

We should not sell out our values for a promise that is spoken in code. Heck, we can’t believe them when they speak plainly (remember “read my lips”), much less when they “imply” something.

Finally, there is the pragmatic issue of teaching the party that they can ignore the values vote. Nothing like giving in once to build an expectation.

To summarize voting for Giuliani is bad because (in order of importance):

1. It compromises our values (lesser evils are still evil).
2. His implication cannot be trusted.
3. It weakens our long term objectives.