Ok.
Mitt Romney believes in expanding abortion services and making everyone pay for it through Romneycare.
Obama believes in expanding abortion services and making everyone pay for it through Obamacare.
How is this a simple choice? From what I can see the faithful prolife Catholic cannot choose either.
Mitt Romney has repudiated his stand on abortioin. Says it was a mistake. Ronald Reagan said the same. The American public believed Reagan, why not Romney? Is it because you WANT to reelect Obama?
That's not technically true. The Mormon Church does discourage abortion, but it is not strictly speaking anti-abortion in the same way the Catholic Church is. The Mormon church says that abortion is ok if your bishop "counsels" a couple that it is ok. (A blanket statement that makes abortion under almost any circumstances alright so long as the local bishop or stake presidency tells you that it's ok.) The Church also states that abortion may be ok in the cases of rape, incest, etc. (That's what the Church's General Handbook of Instructions to Priesthood leader says). So it is true the Mormonism's abortion stance is in line with the "Republican way," but it is not entirely true to say that the Mormon Church is anti-abortion in the same way that the Catholic Church is.
How is this a simple choice? From what I can see the faithful prolife Catholic cannot choose either.
You're right, this is a bit more complicated for Catholics than is being suggested. There are certain sins which are defined by the Catholic Church as "intrinsically evil". Abortion is one of those sins. Immigration is not even in the same category of importance for Catholics. Catholics are bound to do whatever they can reasonably do to stop abortion, but they are not bound to the USSCB's prudential approach to Comprehensive immigration reform.
Romney has also made the choice more difficult by openly endorsing abortion in certain circumstances (such as "health" of the mother, rape, and incest.) All are intrinsic evils to Catholics, unless it is to save a mother's life, and the killing of the baby is not intended.) The health of the mother exception can be used to justify just about any abortion by a mother invoking some frivolous claim about emotional health or whatever. Another problem with Romney, is that he undermines true marriage in practice while verbally claiming to support it. (For instance, Romney endorses Homosexual Adoptions just to name a couple of things.)
These things amongst many other things would make it very difficult for a good Catholic to vote for Romney in good conscience. The only way you could argue that a Catholic may be able to vote for him is that he is the "lesser of two evils" and to vote for him would be to materially cooperate with evil. This raises more complicated moral questions because not all moral theologians agree what circumstances justify a person to materially cooperate with an intrinsic evil to avoid a greater degree of intrinsic evil.
Absolute falsehood. However Obama did insist that pro gay marriage and taxpayer funded abortion on demand up to birth planks be added to the 2012 Democrat Platform.
But I know, the "Conservatives for the Reelection of President Obama" (CREEP0) squad around here doesn't like to discuss those inconvenient truths.
“The law Romney signed did not mention abortion coverage. It [abortion] was included by the state exchange, which created plans that mirror private insurance nationwide. And a court decision two decades earlier mandated that the cost of the abortions be included.”